Historically it has always been the case. During the Warsaw uprising during ww2 the russian troops watched for 2 months as germans levelled the capital to the ground. After everything was destroyed the russian troops only then moved in to liberate Poland.
Moscow has called for a special UN Security Council meeting to address claims that Russian forces committed atrocities against Ukrainian civilians in Bucha, a town outside Kyiv.
“In the light of heinous provocation of Ukrainian radicals in #Bucha Russia requested a meeting of UN #SecurityCouncil on Monday April 4,” Dmitry Polyanskiy, Russia’s deputy ambassador to the United Nations, said on Twitter.
Global outrage at accusations of Russian war crimes in Ukraine have mounted with the discovery of mass graves and corpses in streets near Kyiv, as President Volodymyr Zelenskyy directly blamed leaders in Moscow for the “torture” and “killings” of civilians.
Britain, France, Germany, the United States, NATO and the United Nations all voiced horror and revulsion at the reports of civilians being murdered in Bucha, northwest of the capital, with the atrocities prompting vows of action at the International Criminal Court.
Russia denied the accusations and said Ukraine staged footage of the corpses.
Russia has committed war crimes and must pay.
The Westphalian system is at risk if this is allowed to go on.
MAD means there must be a measured response, but there must be something greater. Europe, and especially Germany, has allowed this to occur due to their hangover from WW2, and race to renewables, but it's time they stand back up on the right side of history.
In the Aus:
War crimes have nothing to do with the Westphalian system, and wrt Ukraine, 2014 saw Russia take control of Crimea, so it's just a principle that's often broken and leads to border clashes and wars. In the context of your comment, "it's been allowed to go on for 8 years!"Russia has committed war crimes and must pay.
The Westphalian system is at risk if this is allowed to go on.
No it doesn't. Attacking nations determine what weapons they will use, and an equal response is reasonable. Who gets involved in defending against an attack is somewhat immaterial. NATO broke their own charter in not defending European democracies when they opted out of assisting Ukraine militarily.MAD means there must be a measured response...
Nope! Once MAD is invoked it's pretty much game over.... but there must be something greater.
Really?Europe, and especially Germany, has allowed this to occur due to their hangover from WW2, and race to renewables, but it's time they stand back up on the right side of history.
So thinking about war crimes and I'm wondering how the Law of War or rules of war (also known as international humanitarian law or the law of armed conflict) even applies as Russia/Putin has named this as a so called "special military operation", how does "jus ad bellium" and "jus in bello" even apply?The rules have changed over the decades as technology has advanced. Amendments to the Geneva Convention adopted in 1949, for example, make clear that civilians should never be a target in war and that prisoners of war must be treated with adequate care.
They are different things and IHL applies to jus in belllo (ie., what occurs during armed conflict), rather than how parties want to describe the nature of the conflict itself ie., jus ad bellium.... how does "jus ad bellium" and "jus in bello" even apply?
I can't see how Putin is protected in any way from international action against him. However, who exactly would enter Russia to put him on trial?By not declaring war, is this how Putin circumnavigates around the Geneva Convention and war crimes et al scenario?
As a UN security council member, does Russia's and hence Putin's power of veto make any legitimate war crime claim against Russia, just a lame duck?
However, who exactly would enter Russia to put him on trial?
Yes but I’m trying to understand, how was jus ad bellium determined between Putin and Ukraine?They are different things and IHL applies to jus in belllo (ie., what occurs during armed conflict), rather than how parties want to describe the nature of the conflict itself ie., jus ad bellium.
I can't see how Putin is protected in any way from international action against him.
However, who exactly would enter Russia to put him on trial?
Jus ad bellum refers to the conditions under which a nation may resort to war, or to force in general, so it can be applied to any conflict without a war necessarily being declared. The term seems to have been invented to suggest there are such things as "just" or righteous wars or conflicts, which I am sure every belligerent would claim to be the case. Putin, for example, claims to be ridding Ukraine of Nazis, which is superficially justifiable ... except there are most likely many more Nazis in Russia itself!Yes but I’m trying to understand, how was jus ad bellium determined between Putin and Ukraine?
Thanks, that confirms my thinking in that any excuse will do for a "just cause".Jus ad bellum refers to the conditions under which a nation may resort to war, or to force in general, so it can be applied to any conflict without a war necessarily being declared. The term seems to have been invented to suggest there are such things as "just" or righteous wars or conflicts, which I am sure every belligerent would claim to be the case. Putin, for example, claims to be ridding Ukraine of Nazis, which is superficially justifiable ... except there are most likely many more Nazis in Russia itself!
America declared a War on Terror, yet invaded a whole nation rather than confined its attack on terrorist elements. The Iraq War had an equally appealing rationale, but lacked credibility.
... to dance around the invasion and leave Ukraine out to dry without a no fly zone...i don't think he's a competent person, leading Australia into dismay around it's policy to China...A filthily individual that passed his overdue date and should be espied.
I must admit that puts me in my place. But I have a hard time reasoning or recognizing to that fact. It's past tenth's and I should let by gone's be by gone's. And roll with the punches. As long as Ukraine get the better of Putin and win the war for their Independence and liberty as a sovereignty free nation. despite the repercussions, I fell Ukraine have been ripped off. The infrastructure damage is a bit much...I thinks the nuke's are just politics...I believe that Biden has made quite a few verbal blunders that cause issues, but what would happen if NATO countries did start shooting down Russian planes, and then Russia took that as a declaration of war and launched their nuclear missiles into those countries?
I must admit that puts me in my place. But I have a hard time reasoning or recognizing to that fact. It's past tenth's and I should let by gone's be by gone's. And roll with the punches. As long as Ukraine get the better of Putin and win the war for their Independence and liberty as a sovereignty free nation. despite the repercussions, I fell Ukraine have been ripped off. The infrastructure damage is a bit much...I thinks the nuke's are just politics...
Kremlin-backed mercenaries employed by the Wagner Group have been pictured for the first time in Ukraine after defence officials warned that more than 1,000 fighters had been deployed.
Images circulated yesterday showed a soldier from the shadowy private army standing in front of the Park Inn hotel in Donetsk. He carries an AK-15, an assault rifle used by Russian special forces, and wears the grinning skull of the Wagner insignia on his uniform.
The photograph was published by Semyon Pegov, a pro-Kremlin war correspondent, who has been embedded with Russian forces in Ukraine.
Wagner is a private militia run by Yevgeny Prigozhin, one of President Putin’s closest allies. It operates as an arm’s-length branch of the state to offer the Kremlin plausible deniability for activities it does not want to be associated with. Its motto is said to be: “Death is our business and business is good.”
“The GRU [Russian military intelligence] use Wagner as their deniable dirty operations troops,” said Philip Ingram, a former British intelligence officer. The fact that they are using AK-15s, the Spetsnaz’s new assault rifle, is a clear indication that they are being contracted and commanded by Russian special forces.”
.... "The more elderly part of society thinks we should preserve ties with Russia," she said. "But the younger generation thinks differently and supports moves towards the West."
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?