Jump to content

 

 

Russia, Ukraine


Recommended Posts

36 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

Gorbachev never got an agreement in writing

I’m not an International Lawyer but does a conversation between the US Secretary of State and the Russian President have treaty status?

 

Meanwhile, that rabid neo-con William Clinton says:

 

”When I first became president, I said that I would support Russian President Boris Yeltsin in his efforts to build a good economy and a functioning democracy after the dissolution of the Soviet Union—but I would also support an expansion of NATO to include former Warsaw Pact members and post-Soviet states. My policy was to work for the best while preparing for the worst. I was worried not about a Russian return to communism, but about a return to ultranationalism, replacing democracy and cooperation with aspirations to empire, like Peter the Great and Catherine the Great. I didn’t believe Yeltsin would do that, but who knew what would come after him?”

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/04/bill-clinton-nato-expansion-ukraine/629499/?utm_source=copy-link&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=share

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Scott7 said:

I’m not an International Lawyer but does a conversation between the US Secretary of State and the Russian President have treaty status?

No. That is why I mentioned it. Additionally a country is quite entitled to break any agreements made in writing. The only difference is the extent of distrust, among counterparts, that will follow.

 

The U.S.A. made a verbal commitment to another county. That commitment was swiftly abandoned.

 

Is the U.S.A. the empire of truth or the empire of something else?

Link to post
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

 

https://nsarchive.gwu.edu/document/16117-document-06-record-conversation-between

 

A conversation between Gorbachev and James Baker. The interesting part is on page 5.

 

Gorbachev never got an agreement in writing and, if I remember correctly, the contents of the conversation were denied.

East = East Germany, no?

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

East = East Germany, no?

Not sure which part of the conversation this is in reference to.

 

There is a completely unambiguous mention of "an eastern direction".

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's certainly looking like the conflict in Ukraine will be lasting a while.  I expect to be seeing faded yellow and blue flags hanging in windows at Christmas.

 

The economic consequences are probably the main issue for Brits/Europeans.  

 

Will Zelensky or Putin cave in and will the West find another cause to get behind in the meantime?  

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, ranger_syntax said:

Not sure which part of the conversation this is in reference to.

 

There is a completely unambiguous mention of "an eastern direction".

https://www.brookings.edu/blog/up-front/2014/11/06/did-nato-promise-not-to-enlarge-gorbachev-says-no/

 

No idea if that source is right, left or centrist.

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, forlanssister said:

Does the alignment of the source matter?

 

The whole point of noting what was said is to avoid people offering alternative accounts afterwards.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Dealing with Gorbachev, and even with Yeltsin, is one thing, dealing with VV Putin, quite another. 

One might say that with the ascension to supremacy of VVP, there occurred a material change in circumstances, which, as, perhaps, is normal, occasioned a change in approach. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

Dealing with Gorbachev, and even with Yeltsin, is one thing, dealing with VV Putin, quite another. 

One might say that with the ascension to supremacy of VVP, there occurred a material change in circumstances, which, as, perhaps, is normal, occasioned a change in approach. 

As mentioned above a country can break any kind of agreement that it likes. It only has to live with the judgement that follows.

 

Your suggestion is not relevant as Bill Clinton was urging expansion into former Warsaw Pact countries in 1996. Putin was not in a position of supremacy at that time.

 

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/10/23/us/clinton-urges-nato-expansion-in-1999.html

Link to post
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Uilleam said:

Dealing with Gorbachev, and even with Yeltsin, is one thing, dealing with VV Putin, quite another. 

One might say that with the ascension to supremacy of VVP, there occurred a material change in circumstances, which, as, perhaps, is normal, occasioned a change in approach. 

Have you heard of 'The Project for the new Russian Century' where they set out how they want to dominate the world ?

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.