Originally posted by PalynkaWhat was Kosovo considered by the UN in January?
South Ossetia was considered a part of Georgia by the UN, so it's ridiculous to argue that a Georgian "invasion" was looming.
If there was indeed ethnic cleansing going on and Russia was indeed motivated by this, then how do you explain that they're not trying to push the UN into sending peace-keepers now that they have control over the region? They have ...[text shortened]... ything of the sort, which sends a clear message about that their motivations go beyond that.
Originally posted by PalynkaOf course the voluntary handing out of Country A's passports to citizens of Country B cannot create a justifiable rationale for meddling in the affairs of Country B.
I know that. I'm talking about using the prevalence of Russian passports as a proxy for support for the recent military intervention.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe passports were offered and a majority wanted them.
Of course the voluntary handing out of Country A's passports to citizens of Country B cannot create a justifiable rationale for meddling in the affairs of Country B.
What the hell is your exact problem on this issue, dude?
Originally posted by shavixmirI have no objection to Russia giving Russian passports to South Ossetians who desired them.
The passports were offered and a majority wanted them.
What the hell is your exact problem on this issue, dude?
I do have a problem with infomast's claim that any alleged mistreatment of these passport holders justifies Russian military intervention inside the nation of Georgia.
Originally posted by no1marauderThe whole point, obviously, is how these areas came to be within the separate State of Georgia in the first place, when the majority of citizens in these areas didn't want to belong to the entity in the first place.
I have no objection to Russia giving Russian passports to South Ossetians who desired them.
I do have a problem with infomast's claim that any alleged mistreatment of these passport holders justifies Russian military intervention inside the nation of Georgia.
OR... and probably more importantly...
Croatia (the 80's) and Kosovo (last February) and the immediate recognition by foreign States.
This leads to the whole concept of anyone and any thing being able to declare independence.
As we write, I'm busy with a referendum in my street and hope, by the end of the week, to declare the Schildstraat in Rotterdam an autonomous entity, a State and break away from Rotterdam, South Holland, the Netherlands, the Benelux, Europe and various international treaties we're tied to at the moment.
And the US will recognise us...
1 edit
Originally posted by shavixmirI agree that the Kosovo misadventure has set an unfortunate precedent. There's a Lech Walesa quote floating around the net to the same effect; I'll see if I can find it.
The whole point, obviously, is how these areas came to be within the separate State of Georgia in the first place, when the majority of citizens in these areas didn't want to belong to the entity in the first place.
OR... and probably more importantly...
Croatia (the 80's) and Kosovo (last February) and the immediate recognition by foreign States. ...[text shortened]... ous international treaties we're tied to at the moment.
And the US will recognise us...
Nonetheless, Russia itself has never recognized South Ossetia's claims of independence.
EDIT: "Recognizing Kosovo will bring nothing but trouble. No one can be denied the right to self-determination, but only within the bounds of common sense...with its irresponsible behaviour, [Kosovo is] causing new divisions in Europe and globally and undermining international relations."
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/harry_de_quetteville/blog/2008/08/11/georgia_comparing_kosovo_and_south_ossetia
Originally posted by no1marauderThey didn't need to. Did they?
I agree that the Kosovo misadventure has set an unfortunate precedent. There's a Lech Walesa quote floating around the net to the same effect; I'll see if I can find it.
Nonetheless, Russia itself has never recognized South Ossetia's claims of independence.
Originally posted by shavixmirObviously they didn't need to to send troops into the area. However, the fact that Russia concedes that South Ossetia is part of Georgia certainly is a relevant factor in discussing whether said military intervention is allowable under international law (maybe).
They didn't need to. Did they?
Originally posted by no1marauderJust saw that Russians killed 5 more people on Jazeera. I don't think an end is in sight; that Russia acknowledges that Georgia has Ossetia is little progress, because everyone knew that already, which is why Russia invaded Georgia in the first place.
Obviously they didn't need to to send troops into the area. However, the fact that Russia concedes that South Ossetia is part of Georgia certainly is a relevant factor in discussing whether said military intervention is allowable under international law (maybe).
Originally posted by no1marauderInternational law, international Schlaw.
Obviously they didn't need to to send troops into the area. However, the fact that Russia concedes that South Ossetia is part of Georgia certainly is a relevant factor in discussing whether said military intervention is allowable under international law (maybe).
As stated in previous comments on Kosovo, Croatia, Iraq, etc.
Originally posted by no1marauderSo, had Russia previously recognized South Ossetia's independence, then the intervention would be justified in your view?
Obviously they didn't need to to send troops into the area. However, the fact that Russia concedes that South Ossetia is part of Georgia certainly is a relevant factor in discussing whether said military intervention is allowable under international law (maybe).
Originally posted by infomastThat's why the "maybe". One state recognizing a claim of independence does not create an internationally recognized "legal" state. IF South Ossetia was an internationally recognized state, than an attack on it might justify a proportional response from another nation to defend it in an emergency. The intervening state would have to bring the issue to the UN Security Council ASAP and otherwise try to resolve the situation by peaceful means if possible.
So, had Russia previously recognized South Ossetia's independence, then the intervention would be justified in your view?
This is, of course, a hypothetical unless you want to make the untenable claim that Russia had recognized South Ossetian independence.
