4 ms·
I'm confused about what this is supposed to achieve. The Budapest treaty already exists. It doesn't include most of Ukraine's neighbors, but Russia certainly si
by ilyagr 5y ago
I'm confused about what this is supposed to achieve. The Budapest treaty already exists. It doesn't include most of Ukraine's neighbors, but Russia certainly signed it.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Security_Assurances https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Budapest_Memorandum_on_Secur...
Why would a new treaty be any better?
UPDATE: Reading the speech, I guess part of the point might be that a new agreement would also prohibit attacks from Ukraine into Russia. ?
I guess this will either become clearer with time or will never be mentioned again.
- throw-ru-938 5y agoThe US, UK and Russia all claim the Budapest Memorandum is not legally binding. So in that respect, a new treaty would indeed be better (although I can see a legally binding treaty being broken by Putin as well).
- warpspin 5y agoI think "collective security" here means it is supposed to be a legally binding treaty which requires automatic military assistance. A mini NATO for Ukraine including Russia, with Ukraine itself being outside NATO. Not the worst idea I so far heard.