We support Ukraine

[mmmPI]

it looks like you don't like reading my links either. I'll tell you briefly. Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war with Ukraine because of the genocide of Ukraine in Dombas. But there are no official accusations. Old grandfather Putin thought something and he said it on TV. Old already. So Russia did not recognize the claim, since there is no official confirmation of the accusation of Ukraine in genocide.

I read and quoted your article that contradict your own statement that "many expert" considered the invasion somewhat legal with a "trick".

Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war, Russia tried to justify it with the idea that it was on humanitarian ground aka, to intervene against a genocide, which the ICJ reject as unfounded argument, citing no genocide was happening in Ukraine.

[mmmPI]

Court's reasoning

The court first determined that it had jurisdiction to order provisional relief "pursuant to Article IX of the Genocide Convention," which empowers the ICJ to resolve disputes over the interpretation, application, or fulfillment of the Convention. The court explained that Article IX applied because Russia and Ukraine had a dispute over whether genocide is occurring in Donetsk and Luhansk.

The court then found that Ukraine had "a plausible right not to be subjected to military operations by the Russian Federation for the purpose of preventing and punishing an alleged genocide" in its territory. One reason for this finding was that there was no evidence before the court substantiating Russia's allegations of genocide. The court also found it "doubtful" that the Convention, in light of its object and purpose, authorizes a contracting party’s unilateral use of force in the territory of another state for the purpose of preventing or punishing an alleged genocide.[20]

The court then determined that there was a plausible link between Ukraine's asserted rights under the Genocide Convention and the main provisional relief it sought—the suspension of Russia's military operations—although it found that such a link was lacking for two other forms of relief requested by Ukraine. The two rights asserted by Ukraine were the right "not to be subject to a false claim of genocide" and the right to "not to be subjected to another State's military operations on its territory based on [an abuse] of the Genocide Convention."

Finally, the court ruled that there is a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused to Ukraine's rights and the situation in Ukraine was sufficiently urgent to warrant provisional relief. On this issue, the court found that "the civilian population affected by the present conflict is extremely vulnerable. The 'special military operation' being conducted by the Russian Federation has resulted in numerous civilian deaths and injuries. It has also caused significant material damage, including the destruction of buildings and infrastructure. Attacks are ongoing and are creating increasingly difficult living conditions for the civilian population. Many persons have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating. A very large number of people are attempting to flee from the most affected cities under extremely insecure conditions."[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_v ... roceedings

[Djmixxx]

Both of these lines were legally flawed,

Expert cited by djmixxx

legally flawed = illegal ? From what times? it's called interpretation of the law.

[mmmPI]

Both of these lines were legally flawed,

Expert cited by djmixxx

legally flawed = illegal ? From what times? it's called interpretation of the law.

- In the case of Iraq, the United States applied a not very clear legal strategy - on the one hand, they used the right to self-defense, on the other hand, they tried to rely on the decisions of the UN Security Council, to which they presented evidence of threats from Iraq. Both of these lines were legally flawed, so the invasion of Iraq was not justified. However, in one case or another, the fact that a state has acted wrongly in the past—which the West certainly has done—does not entitle other states to act wrongfully as well. Especially as illegal as Russia is doing now.

illegal = illegal

it's called literally the word used by your expert are you stupid ?

edit : original article https://meduza.io/feature/2022/02/24/pu ... ochemu-net

in translated version :

https://meduza-io.translate.goog/featur ... _tr_pto=sc


The original title : Putin says the UN Charter gives him the right to self-defense and invade Ukraine. Swiss International Law Researcher Nico Krish Explains Why Not.

The translation seem to be ambiguous but should be "Why it's not the case", as that would reflect more accuratly the content of the article.

[FuryoftheStars]

That's a lost case by Russia

it looks like you don't like reading my links either. I'll tell you briefly. Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war with Ukraine because of the genocide of Ukraine in Dombas. But there are no official accusations. Old grandfather Putin thought something and he said it on TV. Old already. So Russia did not recognize the claim, since there is no official confirmation of the accusation of Ukraine in genocide.

So they (Russia) invaded without making an official declaration of why, seems their why was supposedly this genocide? Seems fishy to me....

Oh, wait! They did!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589

Launching the invasion on 24 February he told the Russian people his goal was to "demilitarise and de-Nazify Ukraine". His declared aim was to protect people subjected to what he called eight years of bullying and genocide by Ukraine's government.

And if you follow one of the links to official Russian media:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843

The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.

[Djmixxx]

That's a lost case by Russia

it looks like you don't like reading my links either. I'll tell you briefly. Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war with Ukraine because of the genocide of Ukraine in Dombas. But there are no official accusations. Old grandfather Putin thought something and he said it on TV. Old already. So Russia did not recognize the claim, since there is no official confirmation of the accusation of Ukraine in genocide.

So they (Russia) invaded without making an official declaration of why, seems their why was supposedly this genocide? Seems fishy to me....

Oh, wait! They did!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589

Launching the invasion on 24 February he told the Russian people his goal was to "demilitarise and de-Nazify Ukraine". His declared aim was to protect people subjected to what he called eight years of bullying and genocide by Ukraine's government.

And if you follow one of the links to official Russian media:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843

The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.

Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers.

It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself.

[mmmPI]

That's a lost case by Russia

it looks like you don't like reading my links either. I'll tell you briefly. Ukraine accused Russia of starting a war with Ukraine because of the genocide of Ukraine in Dombas. But there are no official accusations. Old grandfather Putin thought something and he said it on TV. Old already. So Russia did not recognize the claim, since there is no official confirmation of the accusation of Ukraine in genocide.

So they (Russia) invaded without making an official declaration of why, seems their why was supposedly this genocide? Seems fishy to me....

Oh, wait! They did!
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-56720589

Launching the invasion on 24 February he told the Russian people his goal was to "demilitarise and de-Nazify Ukraine". His declared aim was to protect people subjected to what he called eight years of bullying and genocide by Ukraine's government.

And if you follow one of the links to official Russian media:
http://en.kremlin.ru/events/president/news/67843

The purpose of this operation is to protect people who, for eight years now, have been facing humiliation and genocide perpetrated by the Kiev regime. To this end, we will seek to demilitarise and denazify Ukraine, as well as bring to trial those who perpetrated numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including against citizens of the Russian Federation.

Contrary to what djmixxx is pretending not having the capability to explain, this matters directly in why the ICJ determined it had jurisdiction .

Court's reasoning

The court first determined that it had jurisdiction to order provisional relief "pursuant to Article IX of the Genocide Convention," which empowers the ICJ to resolve disputes over the interpretation, application, or fulfillment of the Convention. The court explained that Article IX applied because Russia and Ukraine had a dispute over whether genocide is occurring in Donetsk and Luhansk.

The court then found that Ukraine had "a plausible right not to be subjected to military operations by the Russian Federation for the purpose of preventing and punishing an alleged genocide" in its territory. One reason for this finding was that there was no evidence before the court substantiating Russia's allegations of genocide. The court also found it "doubtful" that the Convention, in light of its object and purpose, authorizes a contracting party’s unilateral use of force in the territory of another state for the purpose of preventing or punishing an alleged genocide.[20]

The court then determined that there was a plausible link between Ukraine's asserted rights under the Genocide Convention and the main provisional relief it sought—the suspension of Russia's military operations—although it found that such a link was lacking for two other forms of relief requested by Ukraine. The two rights asserted by Ukraine were the right "not to be subject to a false claim of genocide" and the right to "not to be subjected to another State's military operations on its territory based on [an abuse] of the Genocide Convention."

Finally, the court ruled that there is a real and imminent risk that irreparable prejudice will be caused to Ukraine's rights and the situation in Ukraine was sufficiently urgent to warrant provisional relief. On this issue, the court found that "the civilian population affected by the present conflict is extremely vulnerable. The 'special military operation' being conducted by the Russian Federation has resulted in numerous civilian deaths and injuries. It has also caused significant material damage, including the destruction of buildings and infrastructure. Attacks are ongoing and are creating increasingly difficult living conditions for the civilian population. Many persons have no access to the most basic foodstuffs, potable water, electricity, essential medicines or heating. A very large number of people are attempting to flee from the most affected cities under extremely insecure conditions."[10]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ukraine_v ... roceedings

[FuryoftheStars]

Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers.

It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself.

So in other words, you're saying that an official statement from the President of Russia, stating that (in part) one of their reasons for invading Ukraine is to stop the genocide of the Donbass region... what? Doesn't count?

[Djmixxx]

Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers.

It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself.

So in other words, you're saying that an official statement from the President of Russia, stating that (in part) one of their reasons for invading Ukraine is to stop the genocide of the Donbass region... what? Doesn't count?

I want to say that the president's statement and official documents are two big differences.
Putin constantly addressed the people: on the new year, before the elections and so on. But his appeals did not always coincide with the laws that were later adopted.

[mmmPI]

Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers.

It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself.

So in other words, you're saying that an official statement from the President of Russia, stating that (in part) one of their reasons for invading Ukraine is to stop the genocide of the Donbass region... what? Doesn't count?

I think he is trying to say that it's too complicated to read the 20 page report made by the ICJ to explain the case :

https://www.icj-cij.org/public/files/ca ... -00-EN.pdf

[FuryoftheStars]

Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers.

It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself.

So in other words, you're saying that an official statement from the President of Russia, stating that (in part) one of their reasons for invading Ukraine is to stop the genocide of the Donbass region... what? Doesn't count?

I want to say that the president's statement and official documents are two big differences.
Putin constantly addressed the people: on the new year, before the elections and so on. But his appeals did not always coincide with the laws that were later adopted.

Well, seems they never "officially" declared war/invasion/whatever, I guess that means that nothing they've said about why counts?

And really, yeah, it's all propaganda because their real reason is "durr hurr, we want to reclaim our old glory days, but we can't do that if all these countries that were once ours join NATO. DURP!"

[mmmPI]

Interesting references to propaganda. I probably won’t be able to explain to you the difference between propaganda and official diplomatic papers.

It's like listening to the contents of a mortgage agreement from a manager or reading all 196 pages yourself.

So in other words, you're saying that an official statement from the President of Russia, stating that (in part) one of their reasons for invading Ukraine is to stop the genocide of the Donbass region... what? Doesn't count?

I want to say that the president's statement and official documents are two big differences.
Putin constantly addressed the people: on the new year, before the elections and so on. But his appeals did not always coincide with the laws that were later adopted.

Well, seems they never "officially" declared war/invasion/whatever, I guess that means that nothing they've said about why counts?

And really, yeah, it's all propaganda because their real reason is "durr hurr, we want to reclaim our old glory days, but we can't do that if all these countries that were once ours join NATO. DURP!"

It doesn't matter what they "officially declare" according to the document from the ICJ, ( namely the paragraph 33 to 47)

example :

38. The Court recalls that, in an address made on 21 February 2022, the President of the Russian Federation, Mr. Vladimir Putin, described the situation in Donbass as a “horror and genocide, which almost 4 million people are facing”

.39. By a letter dated 24 February 2022 (see paragraph 33 above), the Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations requested the Secretary-General to circulate, as a document of the Security Council, the “text of the address of the President
- 10 - of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, to the citizens of Russia, informing them of the measures taken in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations in exercise of the right of self-defence”. In his address, pronounced on 24 February 2022, the President of the Russian Federation explained that he had decided, “in accordance with Article 51 (chapter VII) of the Charter of the United Nations . . . to conduct a special military operation with the approval of the Federation Council of Russia and pursuant to the treaties on friendship and mutual assistance with the Donetsk People’s Republic and the Lugansk People’s Republic”. He specified that the “purpose” of the special operation was “to protect people who have been subjected to abuse and genocide by the Kiev regime for eight years”. He stated that the Russian Federation had to stop “a genocide” against millions of people and that it would seek the prosecution of those who had committed numerous bloody crimes against civilians, including citizens of the Russian Federation. 40. The Permanent Representative of the Russian Federation to the United Nations, referring to the address by the President of the Russian Federation of 24 February 2022, explained at a meeting of the Security Council on Ukraine that “the purpose of the special operation [was] to protect people who ha[d] been subjected to abuse and genocide by the Kyiv regime for eight years”

This is considered on the question of wether or not there is a dispute concerning a genocide occuring, despite the words of djmixxx, the many mention of the word genocide by Putin on various occasion were part of the thing that were considered by the ICJ as legitimizing their jurisdiction, this voted by 13-2 judges.


Edit: the conclusion of that part :

47. The Court finds therefore that the above-mentioned elements are sufficient at this stage to establish prima facie the existence of a dispute between the Parties relating to the interpretation, application or fulfilment of the Genocide Convention.

Edit 2: conclusion of the whole report :

86 For these reasons,THE COURT, Indicates the following provisional measures:
(1) By thirteen votes to two,The Russian Federation shall immediately suspend the military operations that it commenced on 24 February 2022 in the territory of Ukraine;IN FAVOUR: President Donoghue; JudgesTomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Yusuf, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Salam, Iwasawa, Nolte, Charlesworth; Judge ad hoc Daudet;AGAINST: Vice-President Gevorgian; Judge Xue;

(2) By thirteen votes to two,The Russian Federation shall ensure that any military or irregular armed units which may be directed or supported by it, as well as any organizations and persons which may be subject to its control or direction, take no steps in furtherance of the military operations referred to in point (1) above;IN FAVOUR: President Donoghue; JudgesTomka, Abraham, Bennouna, Yusuf, Sebutinde, Bhandari, Robinson, Salam, Iwasawa, Nolte, Charlesworth; Judge ad hoc Daudet;AGAINST: Vice-President Gevorgian; Judge Xue;

(3) Unanimously,Both Parties shall refrain from any action which might aggravate or extend the dispute before the Court or make it more difficult to resolve.

[FuryoftheStars]

It doesn't matter what they "officially declare" according to the document from the ICJ, ( namely the paragraph 33 to 47)

Oh, I know. I'm just having a bit of fun with this.

---------------------------

By the way, Djmixxx, I realize you have a lot going on trying to defend the holes in your arguments, contradictions, and clear misunderstands of what is written in various articles about what people are saying, but when you get a moment, I'd love to still get a response to this:

This is as true as the US invasion of the territory of Ukraine.

Do you have the US military medal to compare ?

I can draw as much as you like.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/12/pentago ... raine.html

Marvelous. Russian soldiers in Ukraine "this is an attack." US soldiers in Ukraine, "they teach us about democracy."

[...] how [do] you think an article about US soldiers in Ukraine, working with the legally established government in training their military, has any correlation to Russia secretly sending troops into Ukraine to destabilize eastern regions of the country?

[mmmPI]

It doesn't matter what they "officially declare" according to the document from the ICJ, ( namely the paragraph 33 to 47)

Oh, I know. I'm just having a bit of fun with this.

I knew you knew but i wanted to make it extra clear because i have noticed that often times djmix fail to understand article that he post himself and so even when the original langage is Russian.

He said Russia did legally right but not morally, but legally it was considered wrong by the ICJ, and morally it's up to any individual to put the blame on a country or on its leadership or who ever, the original statement that opened this thread is also supporting the Russian people that stand against the war.

[Djmixxx]

[...] how [do] you think an article about US soldiers in Ukraine, working with the legally established government in training their military, has any correlation to Russia secretly sending troops into Ukraine to destabilize eastern regions of the country?

Any interference in the affairs of an independent state is illegal.

-Starting a revolution is illegal.
-It is illegal to overthrow a substantial government.
-It is illegal to influence on the government financially.
-Media censorship is illegal.
-It is illegal to use armed forces on the territory of a foreign country.
-It is illegal to use a dominant position in the world to promote "democracy" at will.

I can fantasize a lot here, but nothing has changed in the world since the appearance of man. The one who is stronger is right.

[Djmixxx]

He said Russia did legally right but not morally, but legally it was considered wrong by the ICJ, and morally it's up to any individual to put the blame on a country or on its leadership or who ever, the original statement that opened this thread is also supporting the Russian people that stand against the war.

This would be a turn if an independent country, which was supported by all of Europe and America, would suddenly say. "Yes! We carried out the genocide of part of the population on the basis of linguistic and geographical principles."

Open the definition of "genocide".

-deliberate creation of living conditions calculated for the complete or partial physical destruction of this group.

OK. There is a group of Russian-speaking people in Ukraine.

In September 2017, Petro Poroshenko signed the law “On Education”[83], effectively introducing a ban on education in state educational institutions in any language other than Ukrainian[84]. The transition to teaching in the Ukrainian language should be fully completed by September 1, 2020.

The Venice Commission, having considered the provisions of the law, pointed out that it involves discrimination against “in particular, the Russian language as the most widely used non-state language”

On April 25, 2019, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine adopted the law “On Ensuring the Functioning of the Ukrainian Language as the State Language”, which approved the Ukrainian language as the only state language[90].

The law, in particular, introduces new norms for the use of the Ukrainian language on television, children from 2020 will study only in Ukrainian schools - schools with Russian and other languages ​​of instruction from September 1, 2020 must be translated into the Ukrainian language of instruction. The law provides for the introduction of the position of a language commissioner who will ensure that the Ukrainian language is not discriminated against

Quite a clear policy of the state to reduce the number of the Russian-speaking group of residents of Ukraine to 0

Only Europe will never recognize this as genocide. Since such a policy is pursued by all the Baltic countries. Reliable and loyal members of the European Union.

Suck the laws of democracy as they say.

Of course this has nothing to do with reality and all this is a figment of my imagination.

[enterisys]

I can fantasize a lot here, but nothing has changed in the world since the appearance of man. The one who is stronger is right.

That is exactly what Germany and its allies thought in 1939.
This is exactly what russia without allies thought in 2022.

[enterisys]

Quite a clear policy of the state to reduce the number of the Russian-speaking group of residents of Ukraine to 0

Only Europe will never recognize this as genocide. Since such a policy is pursued by all the Baltic countries. Reliable and loyal members of the European Union.

Suck the laws of democracy as they say.

Of course this has nothing to do with reality and all this is a figment of my imagination.

You only forgot to add first event - russian invasion in 2014, the rest is just an outcome of such actions.
Oh wait russian speaking population was sent to Lviv gulags prior to that oh wait they didn't.

[Djmixxx]

Quite a clear policy of the state to reduce the number of the Russian-speaking group of residents of Ukraine to 0

Only Europe will never recognize this as genocide. Since such a policy is pursued by all the Baltic countries. Reliable and loyal members of the European Union.

Suck the laws of democracy as they say.

Of course this has nothing to do with reality and all this is a figment of my imagination.

You only forgot to add first event - russian invasion in 2014, the rest is just an outcome of such actions.
Oh wait russian speaking population was sent to Lviv gulags prior to that oh wait they didn't.

I'm shocked. Ukrainian confirms the fact of the genocide of Russian speakers in Ukraine after 2014 (Caution, in a democratic and free Ukraine you will be imprisoned for justifying Putin's words. Although you will simply be killed by local Nazis, who are not in Ukraine). But how can all these words about one evil not cause another evil?

[enterisys]

You only forgot to add first event - russian invasion in 2014, the rest is just an outcome of such actions.
Oh wait russian speaking population was sent to Lviv gulags prior to that oh wait they didn't.

I'm shocked. Ukrainian confirms the fact of the genocide of Russian speakers in Ukraine after 2014 (Caution, in a democratic and free Ukraine you will be imprisoned for justifying Putin's words. Although you will simply be killed by local Nazis, who are not in Ukraine). But how can all these words about one evil not cause another evil?

Of course I confirm, russia is doing genocide of russian speakers in Ukraine after 2014, especially in 2022.