Russia and economic war by the west

Cargo movements between India & Russia and associated trade payments are being routed through outfits and banks in Dubai in transactions that come across like regular bilateral trade between India and UAE.

This is more important than it seems... India used to buy oil and other things from Russia via western stock exchanges... and it was the western stock exchange that set the prices and made profits with every purchase... there was mention of a Russia oil discount for India that India did not get the benefit of because the American traders took the discount themselves and sold it to India at a normal price... so I can see why they want to change that set up.

Poland and even more the Poles are irrelevant, they were brought in as a tool and as tool they would be used. Provided it allow NATO to archive some objectives they will more than happy with that. Article 5 would not play hole, the own NATO (USA) already made is clear to Poland. This is public data.

If we agree that then we can also agree that the Poles are in no position for a land grab till well after the status of Ukraine is settled... the western remains might want to join Poland the same way the eastern and southern areas seem interested in joining the Russian Federation... there would need to be votes first but by then the issues of debt should already have been decided by Russia in its terms to stop calibrating the west of the Ukraine.

How could writing someone debt off harm the target in any way?

Not literally write off, but realise it will never be paid... it was a cost they incurred to achieve a goal and it failed... if it had succeeded they would get their money back with interest, but it didn't so consider it lost.

Please, re-read the Russian official statements but also observe her deeds, carefully. Their actions, and this is clearly and objectively stated[1], are to keep the rule on the International Law in the way it is while removing the points that where hijacked by the west in the process of implementing the «Rules Based International Order».

That is correct, and Putin is a real stickler for the law, but the laws are shitty and can be interpreted in many ways... Russia has been told by the west that it annexed the Crimea... as you say differnt countries can have different stances in the same matter in law and both be right... the fact that the west illegally imposed unilateral sanctions on Russia without following proper procedure means Russia can pretty much ignore the complaints of the west.

The west repeatedly ignore international law... invasions of aggression, like regime change etc, were essentially banned so the west started talking about humanitarian interventions... same thing but sugar coated to give a different after taste... but sugar coated shit still tastes the same I presume.

Another reason is, there is no alternative to them in several cases but just because nobody managed to join enough political forces to create an alternative with substance - there is nothing special about it but just international politics.

It is an internal ethics committee in a frat house... their judgements usually involve having to drink large containers of alcohol without stopping and there is nothing independent or impartial about them. Their reputation is highest with those that supply judges to them, because for the rest of the world they are a rubber stamp tool to make sure all of their colonial history doesn't come back to bite them in the arse.

Especially happy about Libya with opening the gates of migrants to Europe...

E.g. Russia was not forced to join into the Council of Europe, but once she was in their rules had to be followed[3]. Now Russia left, they could left at any time but did it now, and this is purely a political decision of their own.

It is pretty clear the council of europe is nothing but a western boys club that ignores the rules and backs each other to the hilt... except certain countries at certain times.

What Russia will do in general[4], the so called «New World Order», is mostly politically re-organize the existing current state of affairs. There is no way to Russia make wide changes in the ICJ for instance, because it is formally bounded to UNSC and the UNGA, and the changes would be vetoed. Also, these changes are not necessary at all, it works exactly in the way it was designed to work.

What Russia and China and probably India etc will do is create an alternative to the ICJ that is impartial and independent and not so white... The ICJ could rename itself to the ICWDR... international court of white dominance and revenge, while the new structure can adopt the ICJ name.

The ICJ judges changes every 9 years IIRC, and the judges are nominated by the UNSC and the UNGA. The result are nothing but a reflex of the state of affairs at that given moment, and the most influential parties play a major rule. This is by design, and the USSR was quite active on its design, btw.

The core problem is that the UNSC reflect the western allies at the end of WWII, which essentially gives the US multiple votes and multiple vetoes and the vast majority of the people on this planet are not represented at all.

At the point of the next nomination, if Russia is the most influential party it will be reflected in there automatically, there is no need to change anything. If a specific country doesn't have a lot of influence at international level it is not supposed to play any major rule in the decisions - it simply doesn't make sense at international level, and would lead to chaos.

Hahaha.... lead to chaos? Really? Because obviously a judge from Fiji could not be trusted to make the right decisions... because African and Asian states are full of stupid people, and ethics and morality don't exist on the American continent below the US border with Mexico?

Russia mastered the International Law and diplomacy long ago, she is among the best on both and appreciate how it works. Why would she change it?

The fact that the west ignores it and the Russian complies with it, I would say it is the west that wants changes in rules and laws.

Russia just probably wants a fair and independent application of the rules and laws which is not possible with western dominated organisations.

Look at the western missile strikes on Syria over made up chemical weapons attacks... it was obvious it was a fake provocation and their swift action preempted any possibility of a real investigation, which when it finally happened proved nothing happened... but no repercussions for the western states that attacked a country with cruise missiles.

No sanctions... no banning from sports events...

If you really think once Russia consolidate it will starting acting like cowboy west it indicate you literally and absolutely have no idea of who Russia is.

They are reacting against the west doing such things, why would they do that themselves.

[1] Russia (USSR, and at some extent the Empire) is a very legalist country. They mean exactly what they say.

Which is why it is so funny the west is surprised every time they do what they said they were going to do.

Remember not so long ago many members were mocking Putin for his silly red line BS and how weak it made him look saying such things and not backing them up.

Rejected by the EU and US and HATO... the Minsk agreements rejected by Kiev and so the west blamed Russia because Kiev was not implimenting its obligations under that agreement.

Result is the current situation...

‘US aid’ is an oxymoron. It comes as a loan with interest, and can only be spent on US systems with a small amount reserved for bribing various foreign officials. Reference Tony Perkins ‘Confessions of an Economic Hit Man’.

The beneficiaries of US Aid is the US MIC and the US military as it is used by both to offload crap that is either not selling or is now obsolete respectively...

And the country that gets the aid gets to pay for servicing and support that costs more than it would to buy them for themselves from some other country... and as we see in Turkey and Venezuela and Iraq... it doesn't buy you protection either...

GarryB wrote:The core problem is that the UNSC reflect the western allies at the end of WWII, which essentially gives the US multiple votes and multiple vetoes and the vast majority of the people on this planet are not represented at all.

The amount of vetoes is irrelevant, just one is enough. The total amount of votes in this particular case is of minor relevance given the total number of UNSC members, 15. But I fully agree the composition isn't reflecting the current state of affairs. France and UK represent the same thing and both are near irrelevant individually, both seats should have been substituted by one and given to EU at the moment both countries joined the EU, or at least after the Treaty of Lisbon - from this point there is no real independence of both.[1]

This particular setup would not be particularly difficult to implement, the composition doesn't change per si and would not be that different of when Russia got the USSR seat.

[EDIT] one seat would then be vacant, and would need to be occupied by some one to fulfill the numbers of UN Charter. It probably would be a fight between India and Brazil, since both are acceptable by the current members. In this scenario I would bet in India - Brazil isn't really up to the job given the state of its military, and UNSC is about international security...
(and I can tell you by personal experience the Brazilian armed forces agree with me)

Expanding or completely reformulating the UNSC body is extremely difficult but not impossible. There is no mechanism to execute such changes but it can theoretically be created, but of course any permanent member feeling it will be left out will veto it. They can't veto the procedure but can veto the decision.

This is not impossible because there is no formal hierarchy between states/countries, and since system was created by them they can always dissolve or modify it; however the system was created in such way to make it extremely difficult.[2]

The only way is convincing the overwhelming majority of the "world" to actively support such changes. It probably would need to have at least Russia/China/India/Brazil/Iran actively working and negotiating (and already making concessions) behind the scenes to get the necessary support just to start the process. Then organize the «Convention» what will also take some years, put at least 3 years of negotiations but more likely 5 before any kind of outcome. I would not expect anything practical happening in less than 5 years, and the outcome in no less than 10 (in a very optimistic, but not very realistic scenario).

Another major issue is you need to change UN Charter and you simple can't change just one thing on the UN Charter, there is always these infamous: while here why not? Tons of them.

In fact, the written UN Charter have very little to do with what is the «real» UN Charter these days, roughly >72% of it have been modified by violation or is not in force anymore due to disuse.[3] And then you can have some idea of how big this simple UNSC change will become.

In other words, in order to make it happen there will need to have a lot of positive vibes about it flowing around.

[1] I'm aware UK left but it happened recently and doesn't change the situation on the ground.
[2] otherwise, for instance, Russia could actually have been deprived of it veto power.
[3] anyone interested to have look, the only practical way is getting some quality book about the UN law which will bring what is modified and explain why. Nothing with less than 500...600 pages should be really informative.

[EDIT]

GarryB wrote:Hahaha.... lead to chaos? Really? Because obviously a judge from Fiji could not be trusted to make the right decisions... because African and Asian states are full of stupid people, and ethics and morality don't exist on the American continent below the US border with Mexico?

THIS is the current composition of the ICJ, and for the sake of the information there cannot have two judges of the same nationality at the same time.

If you want to have a composition guaranteed to always have a predicted result you are looking for the most hardliner impartial judge, because he/she will be fully predictable.

Law is not a exact science, there are interpretations, lines of tinkering etc. and this is all clearly visible in the judges previous decisions[1a]. If you are in position to chose the judge you do analysis of the candidates previous decisions (and of course there interviews etc.) and access ow they think, and chose the one that match you better.

- This is what competent people want because they can plan accordly and know the outcome, ever before committing the act.

Judges that are partial (in a way or another) are unreliable, he/she is partial in your favor 10 times but some day the circumstances and so changes his partiality.

He/She also have a line of tinkering, and follow it most of the time because most of the time the process are not that relevant, but when you analysis of their decisions you find huge and contradicting deviations. Roughly, he/she say something in a way in one decision, then in similar circumstances in another way in another, suddently changes back to the previous line and go on.

You will see deviations when analyzing decisions of partial judges too but will be fundamented or will be then sustained, when he/she changed their line of tinkering[2a]

- This is what incompetent people want because they are incapable of to do proper planning - or don't plan at all and do everything ad hoc.

In international relations terms «chaos» roughly means lawlessness and unpredictability, the exactly moment we are living and like never before.

This is the exactly the main reason for all this rules to exist, to avoid chaos. But wherever you do chaos will come back at some point because this is the natural state of thing. Given the lack of natural hierarchy between the parts (countries/states) and the fact they are not all equal, there is always the smart pants trying to subvert the thing and when they succeed, abuse of thing, and then the tentative of taking over the whole thing.

[EDIT] The right moment to do it isn't now because this is still too chaotic. Russia should first bring some general normality by force (she is already working on it), in order to other countries feel the results (the thing work in practice), but they should also feel this is a temporary solution because is based on the temporary imposition of set of the rules.

Then, the countries will feel the Russian way was proven correct (or better) and will work to make these set of rules «permanent».

[1a] they may change their tinkering at some point, this normal but doesn't happen often. Usually once or two times maximum during a judge career maximum.
[2a] but a serious guy will make it obvious in their decisions too.

Reality. That closed session must have been fun.

Dagny Taggart
@DagnyTaggart369
·
2h
European Commission approves Putin's proposed payment scheme for Russian gas in closed session - Bloomberg.

The amount of vetoes is irrelevant, just one is enough.

But with discussions and votes having 5 votes amongst the permanent members is certainly an advantage and can make the difference between whether something even comes to a vote.

The total amount of votes in this particular case is of minor relevance given the total number of UNSC members, 15. But I fully agree the composition isn't reflecting the current state of affairs

It is the US plus Russia and China who don't always vote or veto the same...

Hardly reflective of the world...

France and UK represent the same thing and both are near irrelevant individually, both seats should have been substituted by one and given to EU at the moment both countries joined the EU, or at least after the Treaty of Lisbon - from this point there is no real independence of both.[1]

How much influence should white rich europeans get in world affairs today?

This particular setup would not be particularly difficult to implement, the composition doesn't change per si and would not be that different of when Russia got the USSR seat.

Neither would agree, and would likely prefer to strip Russia of its seat on the UNSC.

It probably would be a fight between India and Brazil, since both are acceptable by the current members.

Would it?

America and Asia are both already represented yet no country from Africa... I would say South Africa, or perhaps Libya before it was destroyed by western regime change bullshit destroyed their country...

In this scenario I would bet in India - Brazil isn't really up to the job given the state of its military, and UNSC is about international security...
(and I can tell you by personal experience the Brazilian armed forces agree with me)

The key requirements would be a country in a position that they cannot be dictated to by the US or the west... a country with integrity that does not sell out even though that would be easier... So Iran or Cuba or Vietnam or North Korea perhaps...  

THIS is the current composition of the ICJ, and for the sake of the information there cannot have two judges of the same nationality at the same time.

I am not judging the ICJ by who the judges are, but by the cases the take and the ones they don't take and the verdicts they give which very much seem to suit western interests most of the time.

[EDIT] The right moment to do it isn't now because this is still too chaotic. Russia should first bring some general normality by force (she is already working on it), in order to other countries feel the results (the thing work in practice), but they should also feel this is a temporary solution because is based on the temporary imposition of set of the rules.

You mean the way the west made up fake evidence to invade Iraq and then had Saddam murdered and when it was revealed they had no justification even at the time for the invasion that they said well he was a bad man so it is good that he is gone anyway and everything is just fine... isn't it funny how western leaders never go to trial for anything...

They kidnap people all over the world and torture them in Guantanimo without any rights at all but you would not know that if you didn't look because they are very moral and ethical in their speech... if not their actions.

Even in the current situation it seems Europe believes the borders of Ukraine are sacred and cannot be altered in any way... tell that to Belgrade in 2008 when Kosovo stopped being part of Serbia in the eyes of these sacred border line worshippers of the west... Serbia actually got bombed and attacked with cruise missiles for alledged war crimes.... Putin seems to be guilty of all sorts of war crimes... when does HATO commence the attacks on Russia?

It seems the rule of law is as flexible as ever... which for the rest of the world it becomes a meaningless tool the west uses to bully them and control them.

European Commission approves Putin's proposed payment scheme for Russian gas in closed session - Bloomberg.

Reality is a bitch isn't it... they had no choice... so now it is their idea all along...

But is a natural consequence of them using western bank payments for Russian gas to steal money from Russia in the first place.

Boosting the Ruble is handy but this is all about preventing western banks seizing money supposed to be going to Gasprom for gas that has been seized by that western bank after the gas is delivered...[/quote]

McDonald's announced its exit from the Russian market, 16.05.2022.

McDonald's has announced its withdrawal from the Russian market and the sale of its business in Russia.


This was reported by RIA Novosti with reference to the company's statement.

"After more than 30 years of operation in the country, McDonald's Corporation announced its exit from the Russian market and initiated the process of selling its Russian business," the company said.

Earlier, McDonald's CEO Chris Kempchinski announced that the corporation would temporarily close all of its 850 fast food restaurants in Russia.

https://russian.rt.com/russia/news/1003551-mcdonalds-rossiiskii-rynok

The source announced the resumption of work of McDonald's in Russia under a new brand, 16.05.2022.

The McDonald's restaurant chain company has agreed to transfer business in Russia with one of its Russian partners, who will resume operations in the country under a new brand. This was reported to Izvestia on May 16 by a source close to the company.

“This allows us to keep all the jobs of 62 thousand employees in more than 60 regions in Russia, unique technologies, know-how and all other assets of the company. Management will also remain. This decision was reached as a result of a series of negotiating rounds at the site of the Ministry of Industry and Trade, which were held by Deputy Minister Viktor Yevtukhov, ”a source told Izvestia.

The Ministry of Industry and Trade confirmed to Izvestia that negotiations were taking place. So they noted that the decision of MacDonalds could be called civilized and optimal, if you do not take into account the politicized statement of the parent company.

At the same time, the Russian management, which remains in place, will be provided with all the necessary support by the ministry in reopening restaurants and streamlining business processes.

On May 16, the media, citing McDonald's, announced that the chain was leaving the Russian market and selling its business in the country. It is noted that the company plans to sell its business to a local buyer. This will result in no longer being able to use the McDonald's name, logo or branding. At the same time, the fast food chain will retain its trademarks in the Russian Federation.

https://iz.ru/1335053/2022-05-16/istochnik-soobshchil-o-vozobnovlenii-raboty-mcdonalds-v-rossii-pod-novym-brendom

large part of it is money not taken out by oligarchs

Moscow to resume production of cars under the Moskvich brand

Moscow Mayor Sobyanin decided to resume the production of cars under the Moskvich brand

https://ria.ru/20220516/reno-1788726980.html

MOSCOW, May 16 - RIA Novosti. At the Renault Moscow plant, which becomes the property of the city government, the production of Moskvich will be resumed, Moscow Mayor Sergei Sobyanin wrote in his blog.


"The foreign owner has decided to close the Moscow Renault plant. This is his right. <...> I have decided to take the plant to the balance of the city and resume the production of passenger cars under the historic Moskvich brand," the publication says.

The mayor added that the city authorities will try to keep most of the staff of the plant itself and its related enterprises.
Sobyanin specified that KAMAZ would become Moskvich's main technological partner , and in the future the company would start producing electric vehicles.
The fact that the Renault Russia plant is becoming the property of the Moscow government was announced on Monday morning by the Ministry of Industry and Trade . Renault 's share in AvtoVAZ will now belong to the state represented by NAMI .

**** yeah Moskitch reborn!

The regime running Finland is terrorizing companies to abandon the Russian market. It uses its MSM attack dogs to make sure
that companies get the message.

There have been 100,000 people protesting the entry of the country into NATzO. This is 5% of the population. Way more
than even the ludicrously exaggerated 2014 Maidan turnout in terms of percentage of the population. But we all know that democracy
in the west is a sham.

Global wheat prices hit record high, 16.05.2022.

India’s ban on exports has raised fears of a major food crisis.

Wheat prices surged to a new record high on Monday after India decided to prohibit exports of the commodity as a heatwave hit production. The price climbed to €435 ($453) per ton as the European market opened.

Soft red winter wheat for July delivery rose 4.2%.

New Delhi said this weekend it was curbing exports as the country, the world’s second-largest wheat producer, saw its hottest March on record. The authorities have expressed worries about the food security of the nation’s own 1.4 billion people amid lower production and sharply higher global prices.

Export deals agreed before the directive issued on May 13 could still be honored but future shipments will need government approval, New Delhi said.

The export ban drew sharp criticism from the Group of Seven industrialized nations, which said that such measures “would worsen the crisis” of rising food prices.

India, which possesses major buffer stocks, previously said it was ready to help compensate for some of the supply shortages caused by the Russia-Ukraine conflict. The two countries are major suppliers to the international market, accounting for around 30% of global wheat exports. The situation has raised fears that the world could be on the brink of a major food crisis.

https://www.rt.com/business/555578-global-wheat-prices-record-high/

GarryB wrote:You mean the way the west made up fake evidence to invade Iraq and then had Saddam murdered and when it was revealed they had no justification even at the time for the invasion that they said well he was a bad man so it is good that he is gone anyway and everything is just fine... isn't it funny how western leaders never go to trial for anything...

They kidnap people all over the world and torture them in Guantanimo without any rights at all but you would not know that if you didn't look because they are very moral and ethical in their speech... if not their actions.

Even in the current situation it seems Europe believes the borders of Ukraine are sacred and cannot be altered in any way... tell that to Belgrade in 2008 when Kosovo stopped being part of Serbia in the eyes of these sacred border line worshippers of the west... Serbia actually got bombed and attacked with cruise missiles for alledged war crimes.... Putin seems to be guilty of all sorts of war crimes... when does HATO commence the attacks on Russia?

It seems the rule of law is as flexible as ever... which for the rest of the world it becomes a meaningless tool the west uses to bully them and control them.

What I mean is, nothing is done in a hurry. There are a bunch of countries[1] without any capability to assess anything, or simple don't care at all about who is playing the cards. They are too irrelevant or ever invisible[2] but yet their signature/vote have the same weight of the most powerful ones.

They are easy to convince but Russia/China would not be the only ones trying to do so, the west isn't dead. At the same time Russia and China have their own plans and visions inside the process.

Then, you have a diverse number of players hard to convince simple because they can't assess in short period of time if the situation would improve, worse, or nothing for them.

Groups of countries working together, using the superpowers issue as means to advance their common agenda.

E.g. small/poor countries access to international tribunals. They have the right but not the money, and are completely outside of loop.

A lawyer working at this level can charge very easily 500K USD/EUR/wherever per time he/she put a foot in the tribunal. Needs to annex a paper? (pay), again (pay), new situation (pay).

Those processes tend to be very long, and these fees can easily go to dozens of millions, when not to hundreds of millions - ever Venezuela probably can't afford it at this moment.

These countries not just don't have money but their issues are irrelevant against these numbers, they don't ever bother to try but just take the punch (cheaper). The tribunals are also not free, but equally expensive.

There are a bunch of countries struggling financially to maintain their permanent mission in UN, and their missions is often composed by one person. Of course they will try take take advantages of any situation they can, ever if a minimum one - but also make some charm.

Every time you think about any big change at international level remember: while in here why not ... ?

[1] likely the majority.
[2] Vanuatu comes to mind.

rigoletto wrote:
nex a paper? (pay), again (pay), new situation (pay).

Those processes tend to be very long, and these fees can easily go to dozens of millions, when not to hundreds of millions - ever Venezuela probably can't afford it at this moment.

These countries not just don't have money but their issues are irrelevant against these numbers, they don't ever bother to try but just take the punch (cheaper). The tribunals are also not free, but equally expensive.

There are a bunch of countries struggling financially to maintain their permanent mission in UN, and their missions is often composed by one person. Of course they will try take take advantages of any situation they can, ever if a minimum one - but also make some charm.

.

nope, "international tribunal" means henchmen justifying illegal action of US and all-lies. Did you know no US or UK soldier or politician will never ever be tried by "international tribunal"?

AFAIR once they tried with usa attorney was "excomunicado" and finito with no more proceeding. That's why Russia said **** off.


Russian Security Council vice- chairman Medvedev expressed his (or rather sec council opinion):
"Changing the borders of Ukraine is not recognized. Let's put it mildly: our country does not care about the non-recognition of new borders by the G7 , the true will of the people living there is important,"

https://ria.ru/20220514/granitsy-1788592354.html?utm_source=yxnews&utm_medium=desktop

GunshipDemocracy wrote:Russian Security Council vice- chairman Medvedev expressed his (or rather sec council opinion):
"Changing the borders of Ukraine is not recognized. Let's put it mildly: our country does not care about the non-recognition of new borders by the G7 , the true will of the people living there is important,"

Well, what are they going to do about it? Sanction Russia and seize their assets?

What I mean is, nothing is done in a hurry. There are a bunch of countries[1] without any capability to assess anything, or simple don't care at all about who is playing the cards. They are too irrelevant or ever invisible[2] but yet their signature/vote have the same weight of the most powerful ones.

Most know they can get favours for votes they would not otherwise care much about and use that to their advantage....

Which of course makes a mockery of the process.

They are easy to convince but Russia/China would not be the only ones trying to do so, the west isn't dead. At the same time Russia and China have their own plans and visions inside the process.

The west is often the most influential because they are petty and nasty to those who don't support them... the economic isolation they impose on entire countries to get their way is disgusting.

Those processes tend to be very long, and these fees can easily go to dozens of millions, when not to hundreds of millions - ever Venezuela probably can't afford it at this moment.

While America will have 100 lawyers doing nothing else...

But then their justice system is no different... poor or black you are more likely to go to jail... whether you did it or not.

These countries not just don't have money but their issues are irrelevant against these numbers, they don't ever bother to try but just take the punch (cheaper). The tribunals are also not free, but equally expensive.

The US has a law on its books to say that the US can use military force to extract American citizens held by international courts... but such a thing is ignored by the west when evaluating who is the good guy and who is the bad guy.

There are a bunch of countries struggling financially to maintain their permanent mission in UN, and their missions is often composed by one person. Of course they will try take take advantages of any situation they can, ever if a minimum one - but also make some charm.

The location in the US wont be cheap, or prepared to do favours for the poor countries... without something in return... nudge nudge wink wink.

Russian Security Council vice- chairman Medvedev expressed his (or rather sec council opinion):
"Changing the borders of Ukraine is not recognized. Let's put it mildly: our country does not care about the non-recognition of new borders by the G7 , the true will of the people living there is important,"

The leader of Serbia mentioned that it is interesting that the borders of the Ukraine cannot be altered and are fixed forever, but Kosovo is recognised by the EU.

Belgrade was bombed for aledged war crimes, but Moscow is not.

We all know why and it is called hipocracy.

GarryB wrote:

Russian Security Council vice- chairman Medvedev expressed his (or rather sec council opinion):
"Changing the borders of Ukraine is not recognized. Let's put it mildly: our country does not care about the non-recognition of new borders by the G7 , the true will of the people living there is important,"

The leader of Serbia mentioned that it is interesting that the borders of the Ukraine cannot be altered and are fixed forever, but Kosovo is recognised by the EU.

As I understand it Ukraine failed or refused to confirm legally with Russia the borders a while back, they ignored the 'a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush' Presumably as it thought it would be able to get 'better' borders in the future. Well, the future has arrived and it isn't what they expected!

Now, it seems possible that as part of the 'cessation of hostilities' agreement, the 'new' Ukraine Government will be able to agree the revised line of the border with Russia and the International Community will just have to accept it.

We already know where Kherson might like it to run Maybe there are possible amendments in the west as well but they are real agreed borders so a bit different.

GarryB wrote:While America will have 100 lawyers doing nothing else...

But then their justice system is no different... poor or black you are more likely to go to jail... whether you did it or not.

UN Charter

Article 39

The Security Council shall determine the existence of any threat to the peace, breach of the peace, or act of aggression and shall make recommendations, or decide what measures shall be taken in accordance with Articles 41 and 42, to maintain or restore international peace and security.

This article is in Chapter VII. This is the chapter that make the things happen. This is the deal. This is what really matters.

The «international» written in there isn't in the sense of non-national or transnational, or ever regional but global. This is all about avoiding the WWIII, this is for what this system was designed and the fact we, ever now, are not living in the WWIII (hot war) clearly indicate the system is working exactly as expected.

Localized wars, minor genocides here and there, and other bad things we discuss in here are not desired too, there are provisions to avoid/control them but them fall in the Chapter VI or somewhere else. What in practice means better effort.

Over the time the UNSC came to the conclusion that avoiding the WWIII when it will be just at the blink of its start might be too dangerous, too late, and decided to start violating this article and started to interfere in regional conflicts too. Today, in practice, this article also include «regional» but yet the UNSC, in the sense of terms this rules/system was created, should just get involved when a regional conflict can lead to a global conflict or WWIII. Yet, they some times get involved in non-WWIII scalable regional conflict.

Today, 99.99% of the world population grew, born or at least lived most of their lives inside this system and got accustomed with a high degree of overall peace, the people who designed this system could not ever imagine the world we live now was ever possible.

Currently, just trying to avoid the WWIII isn't enough, the people and more import[1] the countries want more development, distribution of the power, more peaceful elations etc. but not everyone want the same outcome. Apparently the vastly majority want to upgrade the current, proven successfully, system to include the new objectives[2] but some minority want to archive it with a complete new system, the «the rules based international law». And yet there are another a smaller minority for whom everything is fine in the way it is.

In order to upgrade the system and to it work well and in the way this is desired now there is a need of high degree consensus, specially among the major powers, otherwise it will not work. But there is a powerful minority (the rules based international law one) who will work against it until they are obliterated to accept on the contrary, and this is what is happening now but still far from the victory.

That said, everything we discuss in here about how we think world should've be working is at some degree what most of the world also want, but currently this is not possible because the international system we have was not designed to work in this way, but in the way it actually works.

Cheers!

[1] this is country/state level subject, not a people subject - at least not yet.
[2] not yet totally drafted.

https://www.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/uqynur/a_correspondent_for_french_tv_channel_bfmtv/

A correspondent for French TV channel BFMTV, having arrived in Moscow, expected to see empty shelves and high prices.....Nope. My guess is the baby-formula aisle is probably full as well!

US aid is nothing more than money laundering:



https://www.rt.com/news/555644-us-aid-ukraine-money-laundering/?utm_source=Newsletter&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=Email



Top Oil Execs say Russia could likely be shut out permanently; I personally don't think that is possible:


https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/russia-likely-shut-permanently-global-125842840.html

"Shut out permanently"
The EU is talking about mixing russian oil with that from other countries or storing it for 30 days which by the magic of the bureaucracy in Brussels makes it "European".

andalusia wrote:
Top Oil Execs say Russia could likely be shut out permanently; I personally don't think that is possible:


https://www.yahoo.com/finance/news/russia-likely-shut-permanently-global-125842840.html

1) Top execs from Chevron and Woodside Petroleum

2) the world market consists of US/Australia and EU -> together 12% of worlds population

3) India and China not to mention Indonesia/Vietnam are pretty energy hungry but seem they are not worthy to mention since most populated  tigers like Latvia and Estonia took over ?

owais.usmani wrote:in my IMHO

https://twitter.com/thesiriusreport/status/1526905669089107968

In My IMHO its jsut propaganda trick. US agitprop stars disseminating: they got bankrupted after tried not to listen to us. In reality it changes NOTHING. Capital markets? US ones? nobody who is an US vassal or doggie, is going to invest in Russia. China or India know the real story. So this is onl for propaganda.

Clearly friends come first whilst the rest can bargain for it.

Levi
@Levi_godman
· 1h
Russia intends to promote the supply of wheat to the countries of Southeast Asia, the Middle East and Africa, said the head of the Ministry of Economic Development of the Russian Federation Maxim Reshetnikov.

Also

*Walter Bloomberg
@DeItaone
·
32m
RUSSIA SAYS IF IT IS TO OPEN ACCESS TO UKRAINIAN PORTS IN RESPONSE TO U.N. APPEAL, REMOVAL OF SANCTIONS WILL ALSO HAVE TO BE LOOKED AT - INTERFAX