It does seem to be enforced, as far as I know, at least when it's about Crimea. At least one person went to jail over posting stuff on social media about it.So taking that more seriously for a moment, is it actually applicable? I don't know myself, but I recall Russian presidential candidates having campaigns with Russia sans Crimea as part of their platform, so if this is applicable, it doesn't seem to be enforced? (If this is wrong, please elaborate.)
Also, territorial transfers to China, Norway, etc. were legally possible, and potential ones to Japan were apparently acceptable to advocate for. The legal wrinkle is that international law constitutionally trumps Russian law, which if I understand correctly what made the 2010 adjustment of the Norway–Russia border and the Barents Sea possible (but INAL obv.), which might potentially make this a legal headache if it were enforced.
I though Sobchak did that, but maybe I'm misrecalling the details. Related, but not strictly equivalent.Also, I don't know which candidates those would be, because I don't know anyone who did that.
More likely to Chinese skirts, since China is willing to actually invest into Ukrainian industry, not just give it arms so that more Ukrainians can get killed as US proxies...And meanwhile the more Ukraine will cling to US's skirts.
You're precisely as clueless in the matter as you look, then.Now, Donbass is an entirely different story. In my opinion, the men who were responsible for initiating the Strelkov's total failure of an expedition and the follow-up military action in high-density urban terrain should be sent to the international court in Hague to be trialed and, most likely, executed.
Appealing to Constitution, right after a coup? A bold move, m8.You're precisely as clueless in the matter as you look, then.
"The Armed Forces of Ukraine and other military formations cannot be used for limitation of rights and freedoms of citizens by anyone". Constitution of Ukraine, Article 17, Paragraph 4.
Well, I was sort of reflecting the attitude of the modern American ultranationalists, with their 100% normalized Trumpism and "we have the inherent right to fuck over every other country". Since they apparently now feel bold enough to be openly saying that in public, I felt like they would "enjoy" seeing it applied against them. Like whataboutism, but less direct.Which isn't to say that they're going to necessarily screw over Ukraine, although this development is presented as a betrayal in Ukrainian media and by their politicians (hence the over-the-top OP, probably).
I sympathize, but they won't get it. In their bubble there's nothing that can be applied against them, their economic and military primacy is eternal and unchanging. Anyway, this "we can do whatever we want to" isn't a Trump-era phenomenon. It has started at least as long ago as Albright's term as Sec of State, she's the one who loved to operate on the "indispensible and exceptional nation" principle - and would get away with it because by then Russia was a wreck and nobody else was strong enough to stand up to the US. What has changed with Trump is that the usual bullshit about "we bomb for democracy" or liberalism or freedom or whatever poor excuse for forcing its will on weaker countries, has been abandoned. The exceptional people don't need to give reasons to us mere humans anymore...Since they apparently now feel bold enough to be openly saying that in public, I felt like they would "enjoy" seeing it applied against them. Like whataboutism, but less direct.
According to UNIAN, Speaker Parubiy had this to say:PACE said:[2019 Jul 03] A delegation* of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) was in Kyiv on 2 and 3 July 2019 to assess the pre-electoral climate ahead of the early parliamentary elections in Ukraine, scheduled for 21 July.
In a letter dated 2 July 2019, the Speaker of the Verkhovna Rada Andriy Parubiy informed PACE President Liliane Maury Pasquier that the Verkhovna Rada had withdrawn its invitation to observe the early parliamentary elections in Ukraine on 21 July 2019.
As a consequence of this decision, the pre-electoral delegation has decided to cease its activity prematurely.
Channel 112 said:[2019 Jul 04] The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine states the Verkhovna Rada is not obliged to invite the delegation from the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE) to observe the elections in Ukraine. The spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Kateryna Zelenko commented on a statement of the President of PACE Liliane Maury Pasquie that Ukraine has to invite observers of Assembly to monitor election campaigns, as UNIAN reports.
"In the previous years, Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine and PACE had friendly relations. Today it is difficult to characterize it like partnership relations. When trust and respect were mutual, when the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe had high credibility, the Verkhovna Rada leadership invited the PACE to observe elections in Ukraine," Zelenko said.
The spokesperson of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs urged not to forget that there are only two bodies in the Council of Europe whose decisions are mandatory for implementation – Committee of Ministers and the European Court of Human Rights. Moreover, the PACE is an advisory body in accordance with the Statute of the Council of Europe. Ukraine has always been respectful of the advice of the PACE and proceeded from the importance of implementing such advice.