On March 24, 2014, a resolution was presented to the United Nations by Canada, Costa Rica, Germany, Lithuania, Poland and Ukraine which was entitled: “Territorial integrity of Ukraine.”
The resolution: “Affirms its commitment to the sovereignty, political independence, unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine within its internationally recognized borders;”
and
“Calls upon all States to desist and refrain from actions aimed at the
partial or total disruption of the national unity and territorial integrity of Ukraine, including any attempts to modify Ukraine’s borders through the threat or use of force or other unlawful means;”
and
“Calls upon all States, international organizations and specialized
agencies not to recognize any alteration of the status of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol on the basis of the above-mentioned referendum and to refrain from any action or dealing that might be interpreted as recognizing any such altered status.”
Reading it one came away with the feeling that it was pretty benign. Shockingly, it doesn’t mention Russia. It seems to be little more than an affirmation of the long-standing idea that no country should invade another.
It was widely known that the resolution was supported by the United States as one would expect. Also, that it really had as much teeth as a chicken which is typical of the UN resolutions. But in truth all knew that what it required was a show of hands as to whether countries would side with the United States in its efforts to reverse Russia’s seizure of Crimea or go along with Russia or perhaps, not have the courage to stick with the United States and abstain from voting.
I’d suggest one take a good look at the vote to determine who we can count on when push comes to shove. The vote was 100 yes, 11 no and 58 abstentions.
The countries who miss the Soviet Union or who are trying to mimic it which went with Russia were: North Korea, Syria, Cuba, Venezuela, Nicaragua, Bolivia, Belarus, Armenia, Sudan and Zimbabwe. None a particular beacon of light in the world so going with the demon was expected..
The usual African, South American and Caribbean countries couldn’t go with us so they abstained. How do you feel that neither Afghanistan nor Iraq could stand up for us after all the blood we lost in those countries. Brazil and Argentina hedged their bets. China too didn’t want to go one way or the other like India and Pakistan. Some of the nations we’ve given the most to find no need to reciprocate even to such a mild request. It is pretty sad.
You could compare a chart of the most free nations in the world with those who voted for the resolution and I’d bet they’d mirror each other. All of Europe stuck with us knowing the need to stand by an ally.
Then we have other nations: “Israel, Iran, Serbia and several former Soviet republics in Central Asia like Tajikistan and Kyrgyzstan were among those that did not take part in the vote.” I don’t know about you but it seems to me that Israel hedging its bets against the United States is disappointing. What kind of ally is it? It’s pretty remarkable seeing it in the company of Iran and former Soviet countries. Some suggest it had to duck because what the resolution condemned it was doing.
Well, live and learn. Things are only going to get tougher as we move along. Secretary of State John Kerry said that the world is acting as if it is the 18th or 19th Century as he tried to explain away his inability to bring home the bacon from all the meetings he has attended. I’ll have more on his appearance before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in another post. It was sort of eye opening especially when he said in answer to Senator McCain that after all his meetings and discussions with the the Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, he did not know if the Russians were serious in what they are saying about Ukraine.
Matt thank you for the very thorough explanation. I will be reading both books again BUT will have in mind what you shared. On a side note have you been to the locations where Whitey and his crew hung out, did business, planted bodies etc as part of your investigations? Perhaps because its not black-or-white and there are many shades of gray when it comes to the FBI working with the MAfia that I am still fascinated with this case. As children its “those are the good guys” and “those are the bad guys”. Yet this case has opened my eyes up to the facts that these two businesses often work together. This may be par for the course for a man with your experience and background…Thanks again
Matt :
You may well be confirmed in your judgment that the outcome of the Appeal is academic. The issues it presents as its grounds are not academic however ; they are the exact issues you pledged as your blog’s mission to examine thoroughly, without bias, and in the Judge Brandeis spirit of sunshine being the best disinfectant. I urge you therefore to no longer ignore several requests made by readers to pull it down from Pacer and post it. Enough of the ” Vagaries ” relating to the Whitey Bulger Trial Matt, and get back to the track. Starter’s Orders require that having entered the race you must finish it. So the political stuff is all good, but whaddya got for us Seabiscuit ?!?
John:
I’m on the road. I’ll take a look at it when I get settled. Thanks.
Matt-Do you know when the Whitey Bulger appeal will happen and what state? Also what did you like about the book DEADLY ALLIANCE more than BLACK MASS? I thought Dealy Alliance jumped all over the place whereas Black Mass seemed to flow in chronological order. Although because of your website I did learn that the authors of Black Morris were airing out what John Morris wanted to be known among the press. Dealy Alliance is more factual but there were too many chapters on the history of the FBI and Top Echelon Program in my opinion. Thanks Matt
Jerome:
Whitey’s appeal is pending before the First Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston which is the federal appeals court to which a case tried in federal court in Boston is appealed. I didn’t like Black Mass for among other things: its fictitious meeting between Whitey and John Connolly and the conversation between the being in quotes as if there is a transcript of it. I assume they got that version of the Whitey/Connolly meeting from Connolly – obviously they didn’t get it from Whitey – but they spend much of the book criticizing Connolly so I’m put off by their picking and choosing where to believe him – obviously choosing wrongly; Black Mass was also based upon the information from corrupt agent John Morris who had befriended O’Neill and had previously through him tried to get Whitey killed by disclosing he was an informant; I also don’t like it becuse of the animus between O’Neil and Lehr and Billy Bulger which makes it more an attack rather than a true story; and also, the other informant used for Black Mass was Agent Fitzpatrick who has a strange hatred of Billy Bulger and a fuzzy recollection of the past.
Deadly Alliance drilled right in on the issue at hand which is the use of the Top Echelon Program by the FBI to develop informants and to protect them – something the FBI has sought to hide especially in the prosecution of John Connolly – I didn’t see Ranalli coming at the story with other than an attempt to tell the truth. Had people paid more attention to it they would see that what Connolly was doing was what he was supposed to be doing.
You weren’t interested as much as I am in the FBI and its history but to me that is the guts of all that has happened. The big picture is that from J. Edgar down the FBI wanted to use Whitey to get the Mafia. We have to wonder why it did this. We’re told that Connolly is a corrupt agent who went off on a lark of his own which is the total opposite of what happened. Ranalli points out how widespread the knowledge in the FBI that Whitey was its informant and was protected by it.
Could one expect Serbia to vote for the U.S.-NATO proposal? Serbia was bombed for almost three months by that partnership to facilitate the redrawing of borders ( Kosovo). Fifteen years later it is a capital crime to redraw Crimea’s border? The West has a double standard on borders. Will China and Russia do a gas pipeline deal? How does that impact the EU and Ukraine? If Ukraine is relying on the U S for energy supplies they are dreaming. The West’s promises on energy will be as valuable as the Budapest Treaty guarantees.
NC:
I like “redraw Crimea’s borders” that sounds so much better than invading Crimea. Sort of the way the Kremlin would explain it.
China/Russia pipeline is more a pipe dream. The less the West depends on Russia the better off it will be. Russia is no longer a democracy but has become more and more like the former Soviet Union. That’s Putin’s dream to put Humpty Dumpty back again which he’ll never be able to achieve.
Ukraine’s in a bind as far as energy is concerned. All it asks is to be treated like the other Southern European nations who also depend on Russian gas. Putin wants that dependency to mean it must give up its freedoms as the Russians have done. It’s a tough spot for Ukraine but that doesn’t mean people should walk away from it or somehow think that Putin is doing right.
NATO is a shell of what it should be; the only thing deterring Putin is the economic loss he will suffer. If he wanted he could probably roll on Portiers before being stopped.