The Russian "invasion" of the Crimea offers an interesting precedent.
The Ukrainian president is removed from power by the Ukrainian people's elected representatives. Crimean citizens are Ukrainian, may speak Russian but are not Russian.
So, If Barack Obama is removed from power by the American people's elected representatives in Congress, then presumably Mexico may legitimately invade and occupy parts of the southern United States, on the grounds that there are, in Texas and California, large numbers of US citizens who speak Spanish but are NOT Mexican.
The consequences of this bit of Russian realpolitik could be far-reaching.
Trevor Rigg,
15 Greenbank Gardens,
Edinburgh.
The rapidity of events makes it difficult for the man in the street to follow events in the Ukraine.
Speaking in Paris, John Kerry, the US Secretary of State, outlined a lexicon of treaties he alleged had been breached by the Russians in Ukraine. There is one significant and relevant treaty that he omitted to mention. The Montreux convention Regarding the Regime of the Straits prohibits the passage of large naval vessels through the Bosporus. Non Black Sea states, in particular, are limited to displacement of not more than 15,000 tons. As the Obama Doctrine places the containment of China as the prime defence objective, the US would not wish to see their ironclads lost on the Black Sea floor.
I am unsure of the tactic of holding a plebiscite in the Crimea alone, excluding the rest of Ukraine east of the Dnieper. Russia may secure the Crimea and lose the rest of the country. With Nato bases across the border, the peninsula would be vulnerable, and the Black Sea fleet open to first strike attack.
I hope that Vladimir has studied the coordinates.
Jimmy Johnston,
38 Merryland Street,
Glasgow.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article