General Assembly Condemns Russian Annexation of Crimea

[DonViejo]

Source: New York Times



In the first barometer of global condemnation of Russia’s annexation of Crimea, Ukraine and its Western backers persuaded a large majority of countries in the United Nations General Assembly on Thursday to dismiss the annexation as illegal, even as Russia sought to rally world support for the idea of self-determination.

The resolution — which garnered 100 votes in favor, 11 votes against, with 58 abstentions — represented the latest effort to isolate President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia over the annexation.



Read more: http://www.nytimes.com/2014/03/28/world/europe/General-Assembly-Vote-on-Crimea.html?emc=edit_na_20140327

[cosmicone]

1. The coalition of the willing redux

with tiny countries like Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Granada, St. Kitts etc. supporting the Western bullying alliance.

Let's give votes to Neverland, Liliput, Brobdingnag and Disneyland as well.

Look at the abstentions -- they represent a far far bigger population than the 100 countries voting for fascist/neonazi take over of Ukraine assisted by the CIA.

[dipsydoodle]

2. I'd concluded

that the no's and abstention were most probably from South America, Africa , China and India which together represent a somewhat large part of the world.

Anyone got the actual voting record ?

[levp]

5. Here

" target="_blank">

[dipsydoodle]

7. Thanks for that.

.

[levp]

3. Which fascist takeover?

Parliamentarian Poroshenko leads among potential presidential candidates in Ukraine with 24.9% - poll

Your so-called "fascist/neonazi" candidates are in the single digits:

"Svoboda party leader Oleh Tyahnybok from 1.7%, Right Sector leader Dmytro Yarosh from 0.9%, and Ukrainian Choice leader Viktor Medvedchuk from 0.4%."

[newthinking]

10. Then why are members of these parties in executive branch positions?

That poll simply says that those parties don't represent the majority in the country.

Also, since Svoboda and Right Sector were well represented in maidan, if you remove them you end up with a much less than representative swath of the Ukrainian people, which is why this has all been so messy.

If they remove the fascists from major positions in their government then maybe people will be less likely to refer to it as a fascist lined movement. Why hasn't that happened? It's telling. They either are comfortable working with Fascists or they are afraid of them.

[joshcryer]

11. Because when they chose them the protesters had to be appeased.

These were basically speakers at the daily gatherings who got chosen.

Yes it's true that the right wing fascist types were overrepresented. But they chose to come to the protests because it was anti-Russia, so they got more of them to come out.

It does not mean that the protests were illegitimate because 10%-20% of the protesters were far right wingers. That ignores the agency of 80%-90% of the other protesters and is total bullshit.

[newthinking]

12. They *had* to put them in the executive over defense and national security? Appease nazi's is right

And Right Sector and Svoboda were more than 20%.

Maidan was such a center of Neo-nazi activity that Right Sector was formed out of it. Right sector continues to grow and thrive in the chaos, power vacuum and because of their success and position in the government.

Here is their PR video. But don't forget that Svoboda, another fascist party is in charge of the media there and "Freedom of Speech" LOL. Yeah, they are such a minority in the power stucture.

Are you really comfortable with these guys as 2cd in command of Defense and Security in Ukraine?

[joshcryer]

13. No.

They were booed when the right sector idiots were selected. They likely were told by the State Department to put the right wingers in the second in command and in charge of the military to send a message to Russia. Who knows how it went down for sure, but the popular sentiment is against them, and I know this bugs some because they think 80% of western Ukraine is full of neo-nazi fascists, etc.

Maidan was not some sort of neo-nazi nexus. It was diverse and had a wide array of individuals. Few of the dead, in fact, were right wingers or nazi's, mainly because right wingers and nazi's are cowards. You had Jews, anarchists, Russians, Polish, Romanian, whole breadth of population dynamics. Hell the damn thing was started by a Muslim for crying out loud.

Can we please accept that Maidan was a protest against oligarchs? Because if we assume it was a protest for neo-nazi's and the oligarch status quo, they win. Already the cabinet is mostly oligarchs (again because they were the speakers at the speeches because they had the money to get the media together, pay for resources, stuff like that). Let's hope the Ukrainian people vote them out.

[newthinking]

14. Yes there were more "moderate" But it is overall very right wing (tea party) and not representative

of the country as a whole.

You do understand that the same neo cons that brought us the Iraq war had their hands all over this?
We are essentially seeing the resurgence of PNAC and neo-con power. We have to be very careful about buying the goods that are being peddled.


Neocons and the Ukraine Coup
http://consortiumnews.com/2014/02/23/neocons-and-the-ukraine-coup

Nuland, wife of PNAC cofounder Kagen



Denying the Far-Right Role in the Ukrainian Revolution
http://www.fair.org/blog/2014/03/07/denying-the-far-right-role-in-the-ukrainian-revolution/

[blockquote {margin:30px 10px 10px 50px;}]"Snyder insists that "the transitional authorities were not from the right," and that the "new government, chosen by parliament…is very similar in its general orientation." This is simply false; Snyder mentions a couple of political figures who are not fascists, but passes over in silence a number of bonafide far-right extremists who have been given powerful positions.

The new deputy prime minister, Oleksandr Sych, is from Svoboda; National Security Secretary Andriy Parubiy is a co-founder of the neo-Nazi Social-National Party, Svoboda's earlier incarnation; the deputy secretary for National Security is Dmytro Yarosh, the head of Right Sector. Chief prosecutor Oleh Makhnitsky is another Svoboda member, as are the ministers for Agriculture and Ecology (Channel 4, 3/5/14). In short, if the prospect of fascists taking power again in Europe worries you, you should be very worried about Ukraine."


How the far-right took top posts in Ukraine's power vacuum
http://www.channel4.com/news/svoboda-ministers-ukraine-new-government-far-right

[blockquote {margin:30px 10px 10px 50px;}]"The man facing down Putin's aggression as secretary of the Ukrainian National Security and Defence Council is Andriy Parubiy. He oversees national security for the nation having previously served as security commandant during the anti-government protests in Kiev.

Parubiy was the founder of the Social National Party of Ukraine, a fascist party styled on Hitler's Nazis, with membership restricted to ethnic Ukrainians.

The Social National Party would go on to become Svoboda, the far-right nationalist party whose leader Oleh Tyahnybok was one of the three most high profile leaders of the Euromaidan protests - negotiating directly with the Yanukovych regime.

Overseeing the armed forces alongside Parubiy as the Deputy Secretary of National Security is Dmytro Yarosh, the leader of the Right Sector - a group of hardline nationalist streetfighters, who previously boasted they were ready for armed struggle to free Ukraine."

[joshcryer]

15. I don't care. All I care about is ousting the oligarchs.

How can you not see this as a positive opportunity... they elected two in a fucking row (after the "Orange Revolution&quot . Can they break the fucking curse with a third election?

[newthinking]

16. Let's hope Yulia does not get into power then

But it is hard to see this movement really driving oligarchs out of power. The new government itself is aligned with Oligarchs, just different ones. They promoted several of them over the Eastern part of the country.

Not to mention that it seems a lot of the backing (and the daily payments that people were getting that stayed in the square) came from oligarchs. Many Oligarchs are interested in the opportunities this is bringing. There is a lot more money to be made as Ukraine's remaining resources are sold for pennies on the dollar as the IMF brings the wave of austerity on.


The Oligarchy’s Complete Triumph in Ukraine. The ‘Heroes of Maidan Square’ Hoisted by their Own Petard
http://www.strategic-culture.org/news/2014/03/10/oligarchy-complete-triumph-in-ukraine-heroes-maidan-square-hoisted-their-own-petard.html
Dmitry MININ | 10.03.2014 | 00:00

The new head of the Dnipropetrovsk Regional State Administration is Israeli citizen Ihor Kolomoyskyi, a well-known Ukrainian businessman and head of the European Jewish Council. He is ranked the second richest person in Ukraine (2013) with a net worth of USD 3.645 billion. He is a member of various supervisory boards, the co-owner of PrivatBank, the Neftekhimik-Prykarpattya oil refinery, and the oil and gas extracting company Ukrnafta, the vice-president of the Football Federation of Ukraine, and, according to a number of political analysts, one of the most influential people in Ukraine. It was Kolomoyskyi who was always the financial sponsor of the ‘Yulia Tymoshenko’ political project. He lives in Switzerland. The fact that his PrivatBank was one of the first major lending institutions in the country to stop issuing money to the people because of the ‘Maidan troubles’ is evidence of how much of his own money Kolomoyskyi is willing to share with the people of Ukraine. In reality, he needs additional money himself to rectify affairs in his business empire. Much to the joy of Kiev’s new rulers, he has already registered his presence through his offensive remarks towards Russian president Vladimir Putin. Evidently there will be no point waiting for money, only insults.

Sergey Taruta has been appointed the governor of Donetsk region and is co-owner of the Industrial Union of Donbas Corporation, as well as president of FC Metalurh Donetsk. In February 2008, his net worth was USD 2.65 billion and Taruta ranked 8th in the Top-130 Richest Ukrainians. After the global financial crisis, however, his net worth fell dramatically to approximately USD 750 million. He is urgently in need of fresh infusions to restore his former greatness and save his assets. Governing a region as affluent as Donetsk will give him a good chance to do this, where he will be busy collecting objects of ‘high antiquity’. For this reason, he has spent a long time getting closer to former Ukrainian president Viktor Yushchenko.

Looking at these men, and knowing that it is these men who are standing behind the regime’s main figures, you start to wonder why Turchynov and Yatsenyuk are referring to themselves as a «kamikaze government» quite so insistently, and giving themselves a political life of 3-4 months. Why had it been necessary to rush to power quite so fiercely? Acting President Alexander Turchynov says that the provisional government is doomed because it will have to implement unpopular decisions. «Not those promised by the populists, but those that are needed to save Ukraine from default and restore the faith of creditors and investors. It will be criticised and vilified, but it must fulfil its duties and burn for the sake of Ukraine». Once again there is the question of whether it is for the sake of Ukraine or for the sake of its most worthy sons like Kolomoyskyi, Taruta and others. Yatsenyuk has already announced the unconditional acceptance of all IMF conditions, which will have a serious impact on the further deterioration of life for the Ukrainian people. But then on the other hand, fresh money will be received to save big business, which will then move along the already familiar route to offshore accounts and precious safety deposit boxes that will be hidden much more securely than those of the simpleton Yanukovych. It seems that the ‘kamikaze’ of Turchynov and Yatsenyuk is not going to involve anything except cutting out coupons to transfer power to the oligarchs.

[joshcryer]

17. As I said, the oligarchs were the face of it.

Think about it. You want to get rid of corruption. You walk down to your protest square. Day in and day out you have the Kochs and, let's say for the sake of argument, Warren Buffet talking through loud speakers, with big TV screens. What do you do then? Do you ignore them? They're speaking, daily, they're feeding people, they're providing tents, I mean, what do you do? Say fuck off? No, you take what you can get.

Of course, this is the reality, oligarchs are far richer, far more powerful than everyday elites. They quite literally run the show and if they aren't listened to you wind up losing huge swaths of economic behavior. Often times, you wind up in jail, literally due to a request to put you there.

[LanternWaste]

4. I was wondering how this would be spun and rationalized to better validate bias...

I was wondering how this would be spun and rationalized to better validate bias... now I know.

[cosmicone]

6. Look at the roll call

Only the white colonial and imperial powers, their dependencies and the traditional Russia haters voted for it, comprising a smaller population of the world than the countries that abstained. The countries that abstained comprise of the VICTIMS of the white colonial and imperial powers -- Brazil, China, Uganda, Kenya, Tanzania, South Africa, Vietnam, Pakistan -- even Iraq and Afghanistan abstained. Does it not tell you something?

How long are the US, UK, France, Germany, Canada, Australia and Netherlands going to continue their hegemony?

This is EXACTLY what Nelson Mandela said about the use of multilateral organizations by the US for its nefarious purposes and ignoring the very same multilateral organizations when it doesn't.

[davidpdx]

9. Yep, all those 100 small countries

Actually it was dipsy that correctly pegged it (I'm assuming) before he saw the results. Only a handful of large countries actually opted out of voting and the two biggest were China and India. China very rarely votes against or opposite of Russia on anything even though they don't have the best of relations. India will stay neutral because of their economy.

The comparison of this to the invasion of Iraq is ridiculous.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

19. Well, I'm glad Russia has North Korea's blessing.

[jakeXT]

8. Does anyone know who hasn't paid their dues ?

Two dozen countries did not participate in the vote, either because they did not show up or because they have not paid their dues, U.N. diplomats said.

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/27/us-ukraine-crisis-un-idUSBREA2Q1GA20140327

[freshwest]

18. A hundred voted to sanction. Likely it has to do with this:

Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances

The Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances is a political agreement signed in Budapest, Hungary on 5 December 1994, providing security assurances by its signatories relating to Ukraine's accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons.

The Memorandum was originally signed by three nuclear powers, the Russian Federation, the United States of America, and the United Kingdom.

Thus the USA has a say in this.

China and France gave somewhat weaker individual assurances in separate documents...[1]The memorandum included security assurances against threats or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine as well as those of Belarus and Kazakhstan.

But did not ensure that the signatories would use force. Note Ukraine tried, but was unable to get NATO involved, as it is not a member. Military action such as NATO can and does enforce when a member needs it, does not apply. It appears Ukraine has minimal redress and is unable to resist.

As a result Ukraine gave up the world's third largest nuclear weapons stockpile between 1994 and 1996.[2][3]

A big price to pay. Interesting some Ukrainians are quoted as wanting to 'nuke' enemies, so perhaps some wish they hadn't signed the agreement. Hope there are no nuclear materials.

Following the 2014 Crimean crisis, the U.S., Canada and U.K. all separately stated that Russian involvement is in breach of its obligations to Ukraine under the Budapest Memorandum, and in clear violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity.[4][5][6][7]

The Wikipedia page has a lot of details of the relationship with Russia over the years:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances

Just a little bit to think about.

[cosmicone]

20. Funny how the other similar parties

voted against the resolution (Belarus) or abstained (Kazakhstan.)

It is just a Western land grab to deprive Russia's oil exports from the Crimean ports and block Russia from assisting Syria and other thorns in the side of Israel.