Has the US forgotten their obligations under The Budapest Memorandum?

1. 83

   Readmikenowposted 3 years ago

   In 1991, the Soviet Union collapsed.  At that time over 1,900 nuclear weapons were located in Ukraine.  The newly formed Ukraine government had no desire to be a nuclear power.  There was an agreement made with several countries to maintain the sovereignty and security of Ukraine's borders. It was known as the "Budapest Memorandum."
   
   Now that Russia has attacked Ukraine and broken their part of the agreement, where is The US, UK, and others who sighed the Budapest Memorandum?  I suppose agreements are just for show, but their lack of enforcement of this agreement has shown a lot of bad things about the US, UK, and others.
   
   "A key element of the arrangement—many Ukrainians would say the key element—was the readiness of the United States and Russia, joined by Britain, to provide security assurances. The Budapest memorandum committed Washington, Moscow and London, among other things, to “respect the independence and sovereignty and existing borders of Ukraine” and to “refrain from the threat or use of force” against that country.
   
   The Kremlin has violated those commitments. Using soldiers in Russian combat fatigues without identifying insignia, whom Mr. Putin later admitted were Russian, Moscow seized Crimea in March."
   
   https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front … ligations/

   replyreport
2. 79

   KC McGeeposted 3 years ago

   Another example of a document only being as good as it's enforcement or a lack thereof. I guess a threat of nuclear war from one nation can negate the agreements made by others.
   
   Which brings us back to " lack thereof"
   
   It sad that one nation suffers due to the cowardness of others.

   replyreport
   1. 83

      Readmikenowposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      I would have to agree.  This display of cowardness only emboldens Russia.

      replyreport
      1. 79

         KC McGeeposted 3 years agoin reply to this

         Trump had a red line in the sand, biden has a yellow stripe down his back.

         replyreport
3. 73

   someonewhoknowsposted 3 years ago

   We must be absolutely clear in our comments in response to anything that could become seen as being wishy washy  !

   replyreport
4. 84

   Kathryn L Hillposted 3 years ago

   "The Budapest Memorandum was negotiated at political level, but it is not entirely clear whether the instrument is devoid entirely of legal provisions.
   
   It refers to assurances, but it does not impose a legal obligation of military assistance on its parties.
   
   According to Stephen MacFarlane, a professor of international relations, 'It gives signatories justification if they take action, but it does not force anyone to act in Ukraine.'
   
   In the US, neither the George H. W. Bush administration nor the Clinton administration was prepared to give a military commitment to Ukraine, and they did not believe the US Senate would ratify an international treaty and so the memorandum was adopted in more limited terms.
   
   The memorandum has a requirement of consultation among the parties 'in the event a situation arises that raises a question concerning the ... commitments' set out in the memorandum.
   
   Whether or not the memorandum sets out legal obligations, the difficulties that Ukraine has encountered since early 2014 may cast doubt on the credibility of future security assurances that are offered in exchange for nonproliferation commitments.
   
   Regardless, the United States publicly maintains that 'the Memorandum is not legally binding, calling it a 'political commitment'".
   
   https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_ … Assurances

   replyreport
   1. 83

      Readmikenowposted 3 years agoin reply to this

      All this is true.
      
      What is doesn't mention is the intense pressure put on Ukraine by Russia, Western Europe and the US to give up the nuclear weapons they had in their possession.  They didn't want Ukraine to become a nuclear power.
      Ukraine agreed if there was an effort to maintain their sovereignty by all these countries. 
      
      Ukraine messed up in a big way.  They trusted the US and western Europe to back up their agreement. Whether it was a "political" commitment or not, it was a commitment.   
      
      I don't think that will happen again.
      
      "the difficulties that Ukraine has encountered since early 2014 may cast doubt on the credibility of future security assurances that are offered in exchange for nonproliferation commitments."
      
      And old saying goes "Once burned lesson learned."

      replyreport