Legal Case for Aid to Ukraine
1. According to the Budapest Memorandum, the purpose is to provide security assistance to Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine’s elimination of its nuclear arsenal. Ukraine fulfilled its end of the bargain.
2. Specifically, it provides, in relevant part: "[t]he Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used."
3. Russia is a permanent member of the UNSC. As a result, Russia holds veto power, meaning it can block resolutions from being adopted.
4. Russia invaded Ukraine and threatened the use of nuclear weapons. This triggers an obligation by the signatories of the Budapest Memorandum to seek immediate UNSC action to aid Ukraine, as stated in the memorandum.
5. Because Russia holds veto power, it would be practically impossible for the USA or UK to seek UNSC action alone to aid Ukraine.
6. It is a well-established principle in common law that a contract frustrated by impossibility of performance is void ab initio.
7. Assuming the Budapest Memorandum is void ab initio, Ukraine should be entitled to restitution. Since the nuclear weapons cannot be returned, the USA and UK (and realistically every country that has benefitted from nuclear non-proliferation) should provide value equivalent to the deterrence that nuclear arms would have provided.
8. The most obvious form of restitution would be conventional arms sufficient to repel the Russian invasion.
While there may not be any enforcement mechanism, it is simply the right and just thing to do. This is especially the case considering the USA and UK rely on these common law principles in all domestic contract disputes. Provide aid to Ukraine now!
#Ukraine #BudapestMemorandum #SecurityAssistance #InternationalLaw #NuclearNonProliferation #UNSC #CommonLaw #LegalCase #Restitution #RussianAggression #GlobalSecurity @MargoGontar@ngumenyuk@olgatokariuk@Leshchenkos
Here is my best attempt to translate this bizarre and evil note - “Welcome to part three… or whatever. Things are???. I am feeling good about ??? but seems like a good combo of easy attack for me and devastating tragedy ?? I want to do more ???. I have concerns about finding a large enough group. I want to avoid any parents, no pre or post school pick up or drop off. I think parents are super likely to have a gun or attack me with scary ferocity. Maybe I could attack an event at the onsite church.”
@AnnaOdesitka From the page I saw, the “manifesto” was English transliterated using Cyrillic (specifically the Russian alphabet), which is really bizarre. Although, he did have Russian words/phrases written on everything and wore an ФСБ patch.
There are probably so many people who the Army could honor who have received the Medal of Honor. But who did the Army choose to honor instead on their social media page under the Trump admin?
@FlorentGroberg Florent Groberg, a Democrat who spoke at the 2016 DNC where he campaigned against Trump in support of @HillaryClinton and was praised by Obama.
You’d think that the US Army of all places would actually invest in some proper vetting, but nope. Inadequacy, screw ups, and zero political knowledge of anything in the Trump era is totally accepted my many in this admin.
Under the Army Secretary Dan Driscoll @SecArmy, there have been several instances of either him, or the Army promoting anti-Trump Leftists on their official social media channels.
Remember the Vindman screw up?
Are we supposed to believe the Army couldn’t find a Republican and US born soldier?
They had to find an immigrant who voted for Hillary Clinton and spoke at the DNC as Obama’s guest?
Isn’t this the type of thing political advisors are supposed to be keeping Dan Driscoll informed of?
Doesn’t seem like he knows too much about all of the players. A very ALOOF person. Not a good trait to have when you’re in charge of the Army.
Just another observation. I like to pay attention to the details. It’s the details that will get you. Every. Single. Time.
Details present patterns. And patterns present red flags.
Legal Case for Aid to Ukraine
1. According to the Budapest Memorandum, the purpose is to provide security assistance to Ukraine in exchange for Ukraine’s elimination of its nuclear arsenal. Ukraine fulfilled its end of the bargain.
2. Specifically, it provides, in relevant part: "[t]he Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon State party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used."
3. Russia is a permanent member of the UNSC. As a result, Russia holds veto power, meaning it can block resolutions from being adopted.
4. Russia invaded Ukraine and threatened the use of nuclear weapons. This triggers an obligation by the signatories of the Budapest Memorandum to seek immediate UNSC action to aid Ukraine, as stated in the memorandum.
5. Because Russia holds veto power, it would be practically impossible for the USA or UK to seek UNSC action alone to aid Ukraine.
6. It is a well-established principle in common law that a contract frustrated by impossibility of performance is void ab initio.
7. Assuming the Budapest Memorandum is void ab initio, Ukraine should be entitled to restitution. Since the nuclear weapons cannot be returned, the USA and UK (and realistically every country that has benefitted from nuclear non-proliferation) should provide value equivalent to the deterrence that nuclear arms would have provided.
8. The most obvious form of restitution would be conventional arms sufficient to repel the Russian invasion.
While there may not be any enforcement mechanism, it is simply the right and just thing to do. This is especially the case considering the USA and UK rely on these common law principles in all domestic contract disputes. Provide aid to Ukraine now!
#Ukraine #BudapestMemorandum #SecurityAssistance #InternationalLaw #NuclearNonProliferation #UNSC #CommonLaw #LegalCase #Restitution #RussianAggression #GlobalSecurity @MargoGontar@ngumenyuk@olgatokariuk@Leshchenkos
@BohuslavskaKate ‘Unamerican’? 😂😂The US drafted millions of young men in the Civil War, WW1, WW2, Korea, and Vietnam. To this day, all able-bodied 18-year-old men must register for the draft.
You aren’t carrying out anything, you coward.
You’re a pathetic propagandist who sits behind a computer screen and cheerleads war crimes.
Nuclear saber-rattling from dorks like you scare no one.
Oh and great powers don’t fear escalation. We are the escalation.
It was great. I remember watching Scrubs and thinking “might be kind of cool to be a doctor.” Watching The Pitt made me glad I practice law and not medicine. It gave me, however, a tremendous amount of respect for those that do. How can they deal with that intensity day in and day out without melting down, developing a substance abuse problem, etc.
Applied to the Epstein debacle, I agree that people have a tendency to invent conspiracy theories where there is no conspiracy — and your post explains why. On the flip side, when someone says “move along folks, nothing to see here,” there is usually something to see. So, there may not be some grand shadowy conspiracy, but it’s certainly more than nothing. Perhaps that polarity is what is so maddening to people.
@AnnaOdesitka Be careful what you ask for. “If Ukraine doesn’t yield, Russia will invent time travel, go back to 2022, and take Kiev in three days.” - D. Medvedev (probably)
Thanks for the explanation. Although somewhat tangential, I’m curious to get your opinion on this. There are plenty of great Ukrainian lawyers who speak English. But there are very few American lawyers who speak Ukrainian. With more US based companies developing partnerships and/or establishing operations in Ukraine, do you see value, or increased demand for Ukrainian speaking American lawyers, generally speaking.