That's all very technical and I have no doubt you know what you're talking about. However, I simply don't believe that Russia should have invaded Ukraine. It has been a catastrophic decision. I expect that if we wound back the clock to over a year ago, and Russia was in possession of hindsight, all of the Russian forces would have been stood down. The invasion would never had went ahead.
It isn't that technical, Roch. It isn't a difficult concept to understand. Simply "not believing" without knowing how or why, is no kind of position.
Art. 51 of the UN Charter is the right to self defence and collective self defence if attacked(in a nutshell)
R2P (Responsibility to Protect) is a doctrine which justifies intervention by other states to prevent crimes against humanity, genocide, ethnic cleansing and war crimes. Whilst a UN endorsed principle-it has no specific legal framework
R2P is controversial and undoubtedly has been abused as a principle in the past(but that is a different discussion). The breaching of the sovereignty of any nation, which R2P by definition must do, is what makes the invocation of R2P fraught with legal and ethical challenges under International Law. What are the limits of R2P? Again though, that is a different discussion.
The first time that Responsibility to protect doctrine was used to bomb and invade a country was in 1999 in Serbia. Although that is not quite true? NATO justified their bombing under that pretext. R2P was discussed at the UN, years after this in response. As I said, however there is no legal framework around the generally agreed principles of when R2P is justified(crimes against humanity, genocide, ethnic cleansing and war crimes).
NATO, to justify their use of a concept that they just produced from thin air, relied entirely on intelligence reports and stories in their own controlled press. This isn't my opinion. It is what happened. There were no attempts at diplomacy, independent observers being appointed by the UN-nothing. NATO decided without any UN authority or consultation, without even bothering to take it to the UN, that NATO had the authority and legal justification to "prevent genocide" based on media reports.
It is indefensible.
Russia did attempt diplomacy and agreements to solve issues first. Took it to the UN. Had the OSCE appointed to independently report and verify each sides efforts towards the agreements and breaches of those agreements. Look up the OSCE reports where you will be able to see which side was the aggressor and shelling civilians. It is independently recorded. Russia, at least, made sure that events of the last eight years are a matter of record.
All that I have stated above should be discussed in the media. In years past it would have been. At least it would then be an honest discussion. It could be argued that the whole R2P doctrine is flawed. I would agree. It interferes in a nations sovereignty arbitrarily. R2P has clearly been abused in the past by powerful countries/alliances to further their own interests whilst hiding behind humanitarianism.
All being said, Ukraine's crimes against their own citizens are undeniable and a matter of record(even though not discussed in censored Natostan).
Those are the differences between NATO and Russia invoking of R2P, Roch.
Should Russia have done nothing and allowed the crimes against humanity being committed by the Ukraine Armed Forces to continue and accelerate as they were undoubtedly about to do? OSCE reports make this clear. OSCE are not Russian mis-information.
Everyone knows now that the "Russian invasion" was most certainly not, "unprovoked".
Far from being a catastrophic decision for Russia-it has been a disaster for NATO. Russia would do some things differently, but they would have acted even with the benefit of hindsight. This moment has been building for years and is about much more than Ukraine. It is barely about Ukraine at all. It just happens to be the square on the board chosen to start hostilities. The real war-to end Western financial hegemony is going disastrously for NATO's puppet masters. Long in the planning by China, Russia and the burgeoning trading and economic blocs that they are the vanguard of. Preparations have been long in the making and it is pretty clear that Empire has been out manoeuvred.
Russia cannot have nuclear missiles aimed at them on their border, just like US wouldn't allow them on their border. Their status as the two nuclear superpowers dictates that this is the Real-Politik of the situation. It is criminally insane for NATO governments to act this aggressively towards Russia.
