Russia declares war on Ukraine. Live updates from inside Ukraine

MOSCOW, March 9 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian deputy prime minister in charge of defense said “overt threats” by the United States and NATO demonstrate the necessity of equipping the Russian army with modern weapons.

“A hope that after the overt threats by the US and NATO nobody will doubt the necessity of rearming our army and fleet and of reviving our defense industry and military science,” Dmitry Rogozin wrote on his Facebook page on Saturday.

Source: en.ria.ru...

I am not too familiar with the Russian political scene, but I'm not sure if his views are the minority or the majority. Not sure if he's a hawkish military type, or feeling provoked by the rhetoric. Do his compatriots share the same view?

asen_y2k

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

majesticgent
reply to post by WhiteAlice

 

Yes and once the time window has passed you cannot edit the title of the thread. Another member came in here with the same sentiment and an argument ensued in which mods had to step in.

What you are saying has been established is all I'm saying.

When i quoted the Ukrainian news sites on the opening posts, the headlines said Russia declares war on Ukraine.

And this is the most wierd war ever. Ukrainian land has been occupied, yet no one killed. Russian army has infact occupied Ukraine. Lets not forget this is an invasion and an occupation.

What part of Ukraine has been "occupied"? Can you please clarify the area/areas in question for me?

Whole of Crimea has been occupied. Since yesterday Russian forces have been inching further into Kherson.

This article from a Crimean newspaper is talking about the Crimean cabinet allocating 125 million hyrvnia (Ukrainian currency) to military personnel in Crimea. So who is the military personnel that the cabinet is paying?
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Also, according to the same Crimean news source, the upcoming referendum in regards Crimea's status is being declared as having a 70% turnout and that of that 70%, 75-80% will vote to reunify Crimea with Russia:
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Found this as well on Kherson and it has an interesting reference to self defense about a checkpoint being established at Kherson in order to strengthen the entrance to the isthmus. Interestingly enough, it mentions the presence of Russian troops, Cossacks, and self defense (units?): gazeta.crimea.ua...

Fixed the broken links. Just copy paste the articles into google translate.

reply to post by WhiteAlice


That is a good question about paying the troops. A good many of the Ukrainian troops in Crimea are maintaining their loyalty to Ukraine.

Ironically, early into the occupation, an admiral appointed by the new government defected to Crimea/Russia, but a lot of his officers did not follow, so they were blocked in the port by a scuttled decommissioned Russian Navy ship and the Black Sea Fleet.

The self-defense forces are militia that are pro-Russian and are working with the Cossacks and unknown/"Russian" troops to occupy Crimea from the "neo-facist/Nazi" coup that ousted the old president.

Russia does not recognize the new government, and says that the PM (I guess?) in Crimea pleaded for help because he didn't like the coup either, or recognized the new government.

reply to post by majesticgent


However, if the referendum to reunify with Russia passes, aren't all these moves a defensive stance with a potential new ally in expectation of it not being recognized by the prior country of allegiance? Historically, that rarely goes smoothly. What happened when a number of states opted to secede from the United States? The Civil War. However, the question I have is this--if a segment or state of another country chooses, through democratic process, to drop that allegiance and adopt another or become completely autonomous, is it their right? To put that question into our own backyard: If Texas opted to secede from the United States, is that their right? What is more binding--old allegiances/agreements or democracy?

Despite clear evidence otherwise, presented here extensively yesterday, this morning Ukraine has denied that is has "plans to send armed forces to Crimea" and instead Ukrainian troops are performing "training exercises" in base, Interfax news agency quoted Acting Defence Minister Ihor Tenyukh as saying on Sunday. Responding to media speculation about Ukrainian military movements after Russian forces took control of Crimea, Tenyukh said the only troop movements that might be seen would be from one base to another to take part in the training exercises. "No movements, no departures for Crimea by the armed forces are foreseen. They are doing their routine work which the armed have always had," he said. Right, and Russia just happened to launch an ICBM as a "drill" in the middle of the greatest Cold War re-escalation in 30 years.

Adding somewhat to the confusion was the statement by Pavlo Shysholin, head of country’s border guard service tells reporters in Kiev, who said that so far Ukrainian border guards denied entry to 3,500 people and that Ukraine border troops remain in Crimea, would leave only if "forced" but more importanly:

UKRAINE BORDER TROOPS BOOST FORCES ON EAST BORDER: SHYSHOLIN
So there is an escalation in the mobilization, only not toward Crimea, which the Russians already control entirely, but the critical East, which as everyone knows, is the next target for Putin annexation once the Crimean referendum passes in one week.

Confirming just this were just released photos from another major city in east Ukraine, this time Lugansk, where pro-Russian protesters just stormed and took over the city administration building. Their demand: to be part of the March 16 referendum to become part of Russia.

And so one by one, the cities in east Ukraine are slipping away to Russia, even as Obama continues his Key Largo vacation and makes the occasional phone call.

Pictures and maps with the above quote here......

www.zerohedge.com...

Rainbows
Jane

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

majesticgent
reply to post by WhiteAlice

 

Yes and once the time window has passed you cannot edit the title of the thread. Another member came in here with the same sentiment and an argument ensued in which mods had to step in.

What you are saying has been established is all I'm saying.

When i quoted the Ukrainian news sites on the opening posts, the headlines said Russia declares war on Ukraine.

And this is the most wierd war ever. Ukrainian land has been occupied, yet no one killed. Russian army has infact occupied Ukraine. Lets not forget this is an invasion and an occupation.

What part of Ukraine has been "occupied"? Can you please clarify the area/areas in question for me?

Whole of Crimea has been occupied. Since yesterday Russian forces have been inching further into Kherson.

This article from a Crimean newspaper is talking about the Crimean cabinet allocating 125 million hyrvnia (Ukrainian currency) to military personnel in Crimea. So who is the military personnel that the cabinet is paying?
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Also, according to the same Crimean news source, the upcoming referendum in regards Crimea's status is being declared as having a 70% turnout and that of that 70%, 75-80% will vote to reunify Crimea with Russia:
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Found this as well on Kherson and it has an interesting reference to self defense about a checkpoint being established at Kherson in order to strengthen the entrance to the isthmus. Interestingly enough, it mentions the presence of Russian troops, Cossacks, and self defense (units?): gazeta.crimea.ua...

Fixed the broken links. Just copy paste the articles into google translate.

edit on 9/3/14 by WhiteAlice because: fixed broken links that were 404

How do you have a 70 percent turnout on a vote that hasnt happened yet? That makes no sense at all. And i guess the people ofcrimea dot agree dispite Russian propaganda.

www.nytimes.com...

reply to post by WhiteAlice

if a segment or state of another country chooses, through democratic process, to drop that allegiance and adopt another or become completely autonomous, is it their right?

In this case I'm sure that Crimean parliament doesn't have the authority by Ukranian consitution to hold referendum on the question of their status.
Crimea is autonomous Republic within Ukraine. Republic by definition is not fully state though it has almost all the elements of the state like their own parliament, courts and government (executive power in Crimea is being held by Councils of Ministers similar to government), teritorry (administrative borders), population, and Military and Police are govern by the Ukranian parliament.
So IMO Crimean should have the chance to say on their status and if they want to join Russia they should be granted that.

I hope this makes some sense regarding my limited knowledge of English language.

In the past week, Russian Militia and troops sent to Crimea to "protect" ethnic russians there have been reported to:

a) have raped two 15 year old Russian Crimean girls
b) setting up minefields north of Crimea on Ukranian land.
c) Sinking a ship in port to stop Ukranian ships exiting into the Black Sea.
d) Tartar homes have been burnt this morning aswell as vehicles and Tartar beaten by Russian Militia. This will bring a Turkish rsponse surely.

Last week I saw pics of Navy Seals landing in Kiev.

This morning theres reports of British troops landing in Ukraine as part of "training" excercise.

The George Bush Battle Group entered the Black Sea with 17 ships in total.

Poland sent its tanks to the Ukrainian border and called in Article 4 of the NATO charter as a call to security concerns given Russias actions next door.


This is all 1 spark away from major ignition.

zilebeliveunknown
reply to post by WhiteAlice

 

if a segment or state of another country chooses, through democratic process, to drop that allegiance and adopt another or become completely autonomous, is it their right?

In this case I'm sure that Crimean parliament doesn't have the authority by Ukranian consitution to hold referendum on the question of their status.
Crimea is autonomous Republic within Ukraine. Republic by definition is not fully state though it has almost all the elements of the state like their own parliament, courts and government (executive power in Crimea is being held by Councils of Ministers similar to government), teritorry (administrative borders), population, and Military and Police are govern by the Ukranian parliament.
So IMO Crimean should have the chance to say on their status and if they want to join Russia they should be granted that.

I hope this makes some sense regarding my limited knowledge of English language.

edit on 9-3-2014 by zilebeliveunknown because: (no reason given)

Ao you would be ok with chechnya leaving the Russian federation they have been trying for a while now? And of course they arent the only ones so if its ok for putin on crimea is he going to allow Chechnya to vote?

Melbourne_Militia
In the past week, Russian Militia and troops sent to Crimea to "protect" ethnic russians there have been reported to:

a) have raped two 15 year old Russian Crimean girls
b) setting up minefields north of Crimea on Ukranian land.
c) Sinking a ship in port to stop Ukranian ships exiting into the Black Sea.
d) Tartar homes have been burnt this morning aswell as vehicles and Tartar beaten by Russian Militia. This will bring a Turkish rsponse surely.

Last week I saw pics of Navy Seals landing in Kiev.

This morning theres reports of British troops landing in Ukraine as part of "training" excercise.

The George Bush Battle Group entered the Black Sea with 17 ships in total.

Poland sent its tanks to the Ukrainian border and called in Article 4 of the NATO charter as a call to security concerns given Russias actions next door.


This is all 1 spark away from major ignition.

Could you provide links please to a), b), d), Navy Seals, British Troops? I would be very interested in following those up.
Thank you
Rainbows
Jane

reply to post by andy1972


Spot on sir! This is exactly how the control of information works and they have mastered their methods. You keep everyone distracted on something that causes doomporn and fear to all of those who wish to go down that path. We are in the age of remembering our connection to source regardless of your chosen spiritual beliefs they are all paths up the same mountain and we are simply getting to the point of, out of necessity uniting to makes this a better world. I believe they are distracting from the currency wars and trying to deflect the blame of the coming crash away from the internation cabal of bankers who have already been found guilty throughout the past couple years of scandals however no one would know if they pay attention to the mainstream #storm of false information!

reply to post by dragonridr

It's complicated subject like I stated earlier.
I need to get familiar on situation with Russia's ethnic parts of the country in order to answer your question.
If you ask on my personal stance, I hate borders, but reality is different.

angelchemuel

Melbourne_Militia
In the past week, Russian Militia and troops sent to Crimea to "protect" ethnic russians there have been reported to:

a) have raped two 15 year old Russian Crimean girls
b) setting up minefields north of Crimea on Ukranian land.
c) Sinking a ship in port to stop Ukranian ships exiting into the Black Sea.
d) Tartar homes have been burnt this morning aswell as vehicles and Tartar beaten by Russian Militia. This will bring a Turkish rsponse surely.

Last week I saw pics of Navy Seals landing in Kiev.

This morning theres reports of British troops landing in Ukraine as part of "training" excercise.

The George Bush Battle Group entered the Black Sea with 17 ships in total.

Poland sent its tanks to the Ukrainian border and called in Article 4 of the NATO charter as a call to security concerns given Russias actions next door.


This is all 1 spark away from major ignition.

Could you provide links please to a), b), d), Navy Seals, British Troops? I would be very interested in following those up.
Thank you
Rainbows
Jane

As far as a) is concerned, I couldn't find any sources (hadn't personally heard that one before)
b) source
d) source for the arson (was a hotel and 2 cars. hadn't heard about civilian homes getting burned. Only marked with crosses) and source on the beating
sorry if some sources are sketchy. Had a baby to tend to and was rushed, but the stories check out.

reply to post by PutAQuarterIn


Thanks for those links...will check them out later...I need my beddybyes its past midnight here.
Would still like source links to the Seals and British troops.
Rainbows
Jane

dragonridr

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

majesticgent
reply to post by WhiteAlice

 

Yes and once the time window has passed you cannot edit the title of the thread. Another member came in here with the same sentiment and an argument ensued in which mods had to step in.

What you are saying has been established is all I'm saying.

When i quoted the Ukrainian news sites on the opening posts, the headlines said Russia declares war on Ukraine.

And this is the most wierd war ever. Ukrainian land has been occupied, yet no one killed. Russian army has infact occupied Ukraine. Lets not forget this is an invasion and an occupation.

What part of Ukraine has been "occupied"? Can you please clarify the area/areas in question for me?

Whole of Crimea has been occupied. Since yesterday Russian forces have been inching further into Kherson.

This article from a Crimean newspaper is talking about the Crimean cabinet allocating 125 million hyrvnia (Ukrainian currency) to military personnel in Crimea. So who is the military personnel that the cabinet is paying?
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Also, according to the same Crimean news source, the upcoming referendum in regards Crimea's status is being declared as having a 70% turnout and that of that 70%, 75-80% will vote to reunify Crimea with Russia:
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Found this as well on Kherson and it has an interesting reference to self defense about a checkpoint being established at Kherson in order to strengthen the entrance to the isthmus. Interestingly enough, it mentions the presence of Russian troops, Cossacks, and self defense (units?): gazeta.crimea.ua...

Fixed the broken links. Just copy paste the articles into google translate.

edit on 9/3/14 by WhiteAlice because: fixed broken links that were 404

How do you have a 70 percent turnout on a vote that hasnt happened yet? That makes no sense at all. And i guess the people ofcrimea dot agree dispite Russian propaganda.

www.nytimes.com...

edit on 3/9/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)

It's a projection and is stated as such in the original article. They are expecting a 70% turnout for the referendum. The err is in my omitting that word--not the Crimean news source. You're referencing a US news source coming out of Kiev, which is not in Crimea. That is a big issue in terms of bias and precisely why I deliberately sought out a Crimean newspaper.

reply to post by zilebeliveunknown


Crimea has its own parliament and it's own constitution. It has its own presidential representative that fulfills a role of a governor within the Ukraine unitary state. That is what makes it an "autonomous republic" of Ukraine. It'd be comparable to a state within the US but perhaps more closely comparable to one of the tribal reservations, which have partial sovereignty.

If Ukraine engages in something that the people of Crimea do not agree with, then are they still truly bound by Ukraine's Constitution or do they have the right to do their own thing? In contract law, which is similar in many ways, if one member of a contract substantially changes the contract after the agreement, then the contract may be considered null and void. Is the autonomous republic of Crimea permanently bound by that contractual agreement with Ukraine regardless of the opinion may be of those living within Crimea should the referendum pass?

Like I said, what would be your response if a state voted to secede from the United States? Would you respect the opinion and preference of the people residing within the state or would you refuse to acknowledge it, forcing them to stay within the country? In terms of fairness and keeping the autonomy of Crimea in mind, I personally feel that the people of Crimea have the right to self determination. It's their lives--not mine.

zilebeliveunknown
reply to post by dragonridr

 

It's complicated subject like I stated earlier.
I need to get familiar on situation with Russia's ethnic parts of the country in order to answer your question.
If you ask on my personal stance, I hate borders, but reality is different.

Chechnya wanted independence in their last attempt the russians launched a ballistic missile into a downtown city killing families shopping in a bazaar. They later claim these women and children were terrorists.This is why they launched that missile we heard about it was intimidation people in that area are familiar with chechnya.



en.wikipedia.org...

WhiteAlice

dragonridr

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

majesticgent
reply to post by WhiteAlice

 

Yes and once the time window has passed you cannot edit the title of the thread. Another member came in here with the same sentiment and an argument ensued in which mods had to step in.

What you are saying has been established is all I'm saying.

When i quoted the Ukrainian news sites on the opening posts, the headlines said Russia declares war on Ukraine.

And this is the most wierd war ever. Ukrainian land has been occupied, yet no one killed. Russian army has infact occupied Ukraine. Lets not forget this is an invasion and an occupation.

What part of Ukraine has been "occupied"? Can you please clarify the area/areas in question for me?

Whole of Crimea has been occupied. Since yesterday Russian forces have been inching further into Kherson.

This article from a Crimean newspaper is talking about the Crimean cabinet allocating 125 million hyrvnia (Ukrainian currency) to military personnel in Crimea. So who is the military personnel that the cabinet is paying?
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Also, according to the same Crimean news source, the upcoming referendum in regards Crimea's status is being declared as having a 70% turnout and that of that 70%, 75-80% will vote to reunify Crimea with Russia:
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Found this as well on Kherson and it has an interesting reference to self defense about a checkpoint being established at Kherson in order to strengthen the entrance to the isthmus. Interestingly enough, it mentions the presence of Russian troops, Cossacks, and self defense (units?): gazeta.crimea.ua...

Fixed the broken links. Just copy paste the articles into google translate.

edit on 9/3/14 by WhiteAlice because: fixed broken links that were 404

How do you have a 70 percent turnout on a vote that hasnt happened yet? That makes no sense at all. And i guess the people ofcrimea dot agree dispite Russian propaganda.

www.nytimes.com...

edit on 3/9/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)

It's a projection and is stated as such in the original article. They are expecting a 70% turnout for the referendum. The err is in my omitting that word--not the Crimean news source. You're referencing a US news source coming out of Kiev, which is not in Crimea. That is a big issue in terms of bias and precisely why I deliberately sought out a Crimean newspaper.

reply to post by zilebeliveunknown

 

Crimea has its own parliament and it's own constitution. It has its own presidential representative that fulfills a role of a governor within the Ukraine unitary state. That is what makes it an "autonomous republic" of Ukraine. It'd be comparable to a state within the US but perhaps more closely comparable to one of the tribal reservations, which have partial sovereignty.

If Ukraine engages in something that the people of Crimea do not agree with, then are they still truly bound by Ukraine's Constitution or do they have the right to do their own thing? In contract law, which is similar in many ways, if one member of a contract substantially changes the contract after the agreement, then the contract may be considered null and void. Is the autonomous republic of Crimea permanently bound by that contractual agreement with Ukraine regardless of the opinion may be of those living within Crimea should the referendum pass?

Like I said, what would be your response if a state voted to secede from the United States? Would you respect the opinion and preference of the people residing within the state or would you refuse to acknowledge it, forcing them to stay within the country? In terms of fairness and keeping the autonomy of Crimea in mind, I personally feel that the people of Crimea have the right to self determination. It's their lives--not mine.

I believe Lincoln answered that question when the southern states tried to leave. We call it the civil war eventual the north won and the southern states were not allowed to leave.

dragonridr

WhiteAlice

dragonridr

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

WhiteAlice

asen_y2k

majesticgent
reply to post by WhiteAlice

 

Yes and once the time window has passed you cannot edit the title of the thread. Another member came in here with the same sentiment and an argument ensued in which mods had to step in.

What you are saying has been established is all I'm saying.

When i quoted the Ukrainian news sites on the opening posts, the headlines said Russia declares war on Ukraine.

And this is the most wierd war ever. Ukrainian land has been occupied, yet no one killed. Russian army has infact occupied Ukraine. Lets not forget this is an invasion and an occupation.

What part of Ukraine has been "occupied"? Can you please clarify the area/areas in question for me?

Whole of Crimea has been occupied. Since yesterday Russian forces have been inching further into Kherson.

This article from a Crimean newspaper is talking about the Crimean cabinet allocating 125 million hyrvnia (Ukrainian currency) to military personnel in Crimea. So who is the military personnel that the cabinet is paying?
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Also, according to the same Crimean news source, the upcoming referendum in regards Crimea's status is being declared as having a 70% turnout and that of that 70%, 75-80% will vote to reunify Crimea with Russia:
gazeta.crimea.ua...

Found this as well on Kherson and it has an interesting reference to self defense about a checkpoint being established at Kherson in order to strengthen the entrance to the isthmus. Interestingly enough, it mentions the presence of Russian troops, Cossacks, and self defense (units?): gazeta.crimea.ua...

Fixed the broken links. Just copy paste the articles into google translate.

edit on 9/3/14 by WhiteAlice because: fixed broken links that were 404

How do you have a 70 percent turnout on a vote that hasnt happened yet? That makes no sense at all. And i guess the people ofcrimea dot agree dispite Russian propaganda.

www.nytimes.com...

edit on 3/9/14 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)

It's a projection and is stated as such in the original article. They are expecting a 70% turnout for the referendum. The err is in my omitting that word--not the Crimean news source. You're referencing a US news source coming out of Kiev, which is not in Crimea. That is a big issue in terms of bias and precisely why I deliberately sought out a Crimean newspaper.

reply to post by zilebeliveunknown

 

Crimea has its own parliament and it's own constitution. It has its own presidential representative that fulfills a role of a governor within the Ukraine unitary state. That is what makes it an "autonomous republic" of Ukraine. It'd be comparable to a state within the US but perhaps more closely comparable to one of the tribal reservations, which have partial sovereignty.

If Ukraine engages in something that the people of Crimea do not agree with, then are they still truly bound by Ukraine's Constitution or do they have the right to do their own thing? In contract law, which is similar in many ways, if one member of a contract substantially changes the contract after the agreement, then the contract may be considered null and void. Is the autonomous republic of Crimea permanently bound by that contractual agreement with Ukraine regardless of the opinion may be of those living within Crimea should the referendum pass?

Like I said, what would be your response if a state voted to secede from the United States? Would you respect the opinion and preference of the people residing within the state or would you refuse to acknowledge it, forcing them to stay within the country? In terms of fairness and keeping the autonomy of Crimea in mind, I personally feel that the people of Crimea have the right to self determination. It's their lives--not mine.

I believe Lincoln answered that question when the southern states tried to leave. We call it the civil war eventual the north won and the southern states were not allowed to leave.

Bingo. Several Southern states voted to secede from the US in 1861 and the end result was the civil war, which those states lost. In essence, military force was used to force the South to remain within the US. Any time that one portion of a country wishes to leave an united country, it eventually becomes a civil war. Russia did it with Chechnya. That is "might makes right". Heck, even in Plato's the Republic where Socrates railed against this sort of "might makes right" policy that formed the basis of Athenian politics when one of its constituent cities disagreed with Athens. See Melos, 416 BC. It's a tale as old as time.

We tout the moral and ethical virtues of democracy so much but then, have very little respect with those opinions that disagree with their own. It's human nature, I suppose, because really, look at most divorces and how they end up in pretty big fights. Russia is no better than we are in that regard and frankly, I find both to be unpalatable. You'd think that, for our love of democracy and self determination, that we would've escaped the "might makes right" mentality that is behind civil war and has been an issue for a couple thousand or so years.

Drives me nuts.

reply to post by WhiteAlice

Crimea has its own parliament and it's own constitution.

Yes, and their constitution is requiered to be in accordance with Ukranian constitution.

It has its own presidential representative that fulfills a role of a governor within the Ukraine unitary state. That is what makes it an "autonomous republic" of Ukraine.

Those are the technical elements of their power.
What makes them a republic is the fact that that region is mostly populated with other ethnic groups, so the state allowed them to have more 'freedom' by establishing autonomous republic.

If Ukraine engages in something that the people of Crimea do not agree with, then are they still truly bound by Ukraine's Constitution or do they have the right to do their own thing?

They do not have the right to act past Ukraine decisions.

Is the autonomous republic of Crimea permanently bound by that contractual agreement with Ukraine regardless of the opinion may be of those living within Crimea should the referendum pass?

I don't know the details of the agreement that Kruchev signed with Ukraine when Russia gave Crimea to Ukraine.
The most important thing to answer your question is that Crimea atm doesn't have any legal mechanisms on their side to hold referendum, hence why Kiev considers it's illegal.

Like I said, what would be your response if a state voted to secede from the United States?

Well they are already states and as I think every state within the US has the elements of statehood.
I will always be on the people's side.

In terms of fairness and keeping the autonomy of Crimea in mind, I personally feel that the people of Crimea have the right to self determination. It's their lives--not mine.

Fully agreed.

reply to post by zilebeliveunknown

The most important thing to answer your question is that Crimea atm doesn't have any legal mechanisms on their side to hold referendum, hence why Kiev considers it's illegal.

The current Government in Kiev was put there by the puppet masters. It is an unconstitutional Government and is not recognized by the Crimians or by many other sectors in the Ukraine. So how can an unconstitutional Government expect the rest of the country to abide by the constitution.

This is simply a case of the pot calling the kettle unconstitutional.

P