• 0 Posts
  • 524 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
cake
Cake day: June 11th, 2023

help-circle






  • But the standards for an organisation like Amnesty International saying a state is committing genocide are much higher than a random person on the internet.

    To make a claim like that, they have to have specific evidence satisfying the actual definitions in international law, which is what this whole report is about. It’s all well and good for you to go “well it’s obvious to me”, but that doesn’t meet the standards of evidence for a reputable NGO like them to make a statement like that.

    They agree with your stance, so I’m not sure I understand why your response to them - explicitly - saying “this is genocide” is to chew them out for it.






  • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zonetoPolitical Memes@lemmy.worldrEd lINeS
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    That’s a very reductive description of the orange revolution and euromaidan, though.

    In both cases, the US didn’t come in and overthrow the Ukrainian government, there was no assassination, no military coup. At a stretch the most you could reasonably argue the US was involved was egging them on.

    It was just an enormous number of Ukrainians protesting the abuse of their political system.

    The first time, because the president ordered the kidnapping of a journalist ON VIDEO (whose body was then found, decapitated) then attempted to rig the election in favour of his successor - this resulted in massive protests until the election was re-run (this time with international observers) at the demand of their own supreme court.

    The latter because the president ran on a platform of EU alignment, then immediately betrayed the people who elected him by doing the exact opposite in order to placate Russia. He was then removed by parliament, who had a legal right to do exactly that.

    Note how, both times, the government was removed, not by a couple, but by the legitimate political institutions of the country.






  • Making decisions and recognizing a state are fundamentally different things though, right?

    Recognition is a very specific thing where a nation formally acknowledges their existence as a state, which also affects their ability to e.g. make diplomatic agreements.

    But doing so is totally separate from how you act toward that nation in practice.

    Russia, for example, recognises Ukraine as a country (currently), but actively does not respect their right to self-determination or their internationally recognised borders. But it would be wrong to claim that they don’t recognise Ukraine, despite that.