The Russian Annexation Of Crimea

“If the region were not already possessed by a rival, then a state might acquire it in one of three ways, by persuading the indigenous inhabitants to submit themselves to its overlordship; by purchasing from those inhabitants the right to settle part or parts of it; by unilateral possession, on the basis of first discovery and effective occupation (M. Borch 2001)”.

The annexation of Texas was a path that many Texans wanted. Nearly ninety percent of Texans wanted to become part of the United States. “People hadn’t come to Texas to become part of the British Empire; most were particularly incensed by the British insistence on emancipation of the slaves; responding to public sentiment, the Texas Senate demanded that President Houston give them a full accounting of his dealings with Great Britain”. Before annexation, The Republic of Texas was a sovereign nation that existed for nearly ten years. The annexation process was proposed by John Tyler. Unfortunately, President Martin Van Buren struck down the annexation of Texas out of fear that this would expand slave territory and ensue war with Mexico. The Treaty of Annexation, Treaty of Guadalupe-Hidalgo, Mexican-American War and Joint Resolution of Congress all impacted the annexation process.

The Soviet Union, after 69 years if being a country, has done a gaggle of things. From space achievements to putting the most funding into their military than any other country at the time, these events all deserve to be remembered in Soviet Union textbooks. However, there are three things that must be in those Soviet textbooks which would be geographic expansion, military strength, and their Olympic values. All of these show that communism was capable of producing greatness and nationalism in their people. Geographic expansion should be included in Soviet Union textbooks because it shows the determination of their country, their leaders need to protect their country, and it shows their ideals.

In the international community, a country’s domestic policies may often interfere with that of the community’s wishes. Throughout the Cold War, there was often tension between a country’s autonomy and the wishes of a particular sphere of influence or international body. Despite the great assistance in the attainment of human rights and attempts at peace, often greater conflict occurred due to this interference in each country’s domestic policies rather than serving their original purpose. Although international influence and control promotes singular agreements and policies, countries should be allowed to remain completely autonomous within their domestic policies in order to maintain peace, encourage diverse policy, and allow for independence internationally.

In 2014, Russia captured the Crimea and Sevastopol, and unfurled tens of thousands of troops near Ukraine border. This is where the conflict flashed between pro-Russian separatists and the new government in Kiev. Russia's actions, including reported military aid for separatist troops, mark a serious major threat to generally accepted principles of world order, such as, sovereignty and

International law in the nineteenth century provided that only by way of conquest, validated by treaty or subjugation, or by a treaty of cession could an independent State’s complete sovereignty be terminated, thereby merging the former State into that of a successor State.

The conflict and subsequent invasion of the Ukraine by Russia came as a surprise to many people in the world, including to the United States intelligence community. This surprise move by the Russian government caused many members of Congress to point the blame at the intelligence community for failing to accurately predict this move, thus limiting the United States and NATOs ability to respond in a timely manner. But was there really an intelligence failure or was this action something that was

From a century to another and from regime to regime Russians have been accused of empire-building and imperialism. It is not always without a reason, since the Tsarist Russian Empire was clearly and undeniably imperialistic. (Beissinger 1995) However, the case of Soviet Union and especially their rule over Central Asia is more ambiguous and unique. It is highly disputable whether Soviet actions were actions of state-building or actions of empire-building. In this essay I examine Soviet rule in Central Asia in order to find out if it was imperialistic, and if so, to what extent. I argue that there are several facts that support the idea of Soviet imperialism in Central Asia and therefore it is correct to define it as imperialistic. Yet at the same time there are several facts that demonstrate how Soviet Union was very different from earlier Western Empires such as the British Empire. Some evidence even makes Soviet actions to be seen as actions of state-building. Therefore it is to be noticed, that the Soviet Union was not entirely imperialistic and when it was, it was imperialistic in a very unique way.

The two countries, Russia and Ukraine, had different reactions towards the armed violence and impeachment of the Ukrainian president. Although the majority of the Ukrainians opposed Viktor’s decision to procrastinate the signing the EU-Ukraine integration agreement, all the ex-presidents accused for its interference with the affairs of Crimean. The former presidents of Ukraine, including Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma described the present crisis as Russia’s political interventions designed to interfere with the internal affairs of Ukraine and its relationship with the European Union (Hanschke 1). The people of Crimea have not been seeking for secession from Ukraine, but their interest is to have extended autonomy and rights to govern the Crimean affairs with minimum involvement of the government of Ukraine. Russia, on the other hand, have dismissed the accusation and stated that it is pursuing the interest of the people of Crimea to join the Federation of Russia. Russia holds that the people of Crimea have the power to decide the future of their territory and Russia will be ready to respect their decision. Study shows that about 90

The crisis in Ukraine and Crimea’s recent accession to Russia are events that clearly highlight the underlying sources of conflict in global politics. While Russia sees its actions in Crimea as a “reunification” and the respect for the right of self-determination, the West views it as a threat to European security and a violation of territorial integrity. Crimea has been a debatable topic from the time it came under the control of the Russian Empire in 1783 during the reign of Catherine the Great. The justification then was similar to the reasoning being used by Vladimir Putin today. Catherine declared that she was protecting ethnic Russians in the region from the Ottoman Empire, much as Putin is claiming to protect Russians from Ukrainian

Under international law Russia’s invasion of the Crimean Peninsula is illegal as the Referendum held on the 16th of March by Russia infringed upon the

Article 2 emphasizes the rudimentary importance of sovereignty in international law as almost absolute. This belief has been further demonstrated in General Assembly Resolutions. Resolution 2625, accepts the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. Amongst other considerations, it confirms the importance of the Charter and sovereign equality. General Assembly Resolution 3314, defines aggression and calls upon members to refrain from aggression as well as other uses of force that would not be in compliance with the Charter. It also reinforces the Declaration on Principles of International Law Concerning Friendly Relations and Co-operation among States. Declaration 42/22, the approval of the Declaration on the Enhancement of the Effectiveness of the Principle of Refraining from the Threat or Use of Force in International Relations, once again reaffirms the importance of non-intervention, the importance of peaceful relations and the necessity for peaceful means to be used in conflict resolution because a) the risks and concerns associated with conflict and more importantly in this

In early 2014, Russia made the decision to conduct an illegal military intervention into Ukraine. It all began when there was a dispute over whether Ukraine should accept financial help from Russia or Europe, which then ascended into the ousting of the Ukrainian president and then invasion of Ukraine. More specifically, Russia began to taking over the Ukraine territory of the Crimean Peninsula through illegal use of force (Global Security, 2016). During that time, the Russian government voted to place Crimean’s into the Russian Federation, which had been rapidly accepted by the President of Russia himself, Vladimir Putin. Most of the Crimean population is ethnic Russians, although there are also the pro-Ukraine Tatar minorities that make

Sovereignty is a norm of the International system upon which the ‘society of states’ rests. Territorial sovereignty refers specifically to the power of the state ‘the territorial limits within which state authority may be exercised on an exclusive basis.’ This essay will explore the concept and development of sovereignty within the system of states. Firstly, it will identify the state system before the ‘Peace of Westphalia’ in 1648, then it will compare the ever changing forms of sovereignty since, and the reasons for change, which have established the modern form of sovereignty which exists today.

The political relations between Ukraine and Russia as the two independent subjects of international relations were established in 1991 after the eighth December of the same year signed the Belavezha agreement between Russia, Ukraine and Belarus, which marked the end of the existence of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics as " subject of international law and geopolitical reality "and the establishment of the Commonwealth of Independent States. From that moment we can talk about the beginning of the existence of full political relations between Russia and Ukraine.