All Ukrainian politicians, including the President of Ukraine, tend to produce inspirational speeches about the protection against the Russian aggressor, the crimes of the aggressor, and the support for Ukrainian soldiers.
However, so far the only law in which there is a reference to the fact that Russia has occupied not only Crimea, but also parts of Donetsk and Luhansk – are the transitional provisions of the Tax Code of Ukraine. For two years the parliament has been sabotaging the adoption of the law that places responsibility on Russia for the occupation of part of the Ukrainian territory, while the President is sabotaging his constitutional duty to make a decision on the use of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in case of armed aggression against Ukraine (paragraph 19 of Article 106), which puts in jeopardy every soldier who has been defending us, just like it happened to Vitaliy Markiv.
Yesterday, the Verkhovna Rada Committee on National Security and Defence rejected a draft law #6400 “On Temporarily Occupied by the Russian Federation Territories of Ukraine”. Taras Pastukh was the only deputy who voted “for”. The rejection was accompanied by a sincere confession of the Committee’s chairman that he would never recognize these territories occupied.” The committee, which should ensure the security and defence of Ukraine, unanimously with Russia denies the occupation of part of the Ukrainian territory, and confirms the Russian myths that “there are no Russian troops”, that Ukraine is defending itself from mythical “terrorists”, “miners” and “metallurgists”.
This decision was made against the backdrop of an active discussion of Putin’s proposal to introduce a “peacekeeping mission” to Donbas. The Committee rejoiced at this “victory”. But who is supposed to reconcile with whom?
The decisions to use peacekeeping missions are made by the UN Security Council, which refuses to recognize Russia’s participation in the war in Ukraine, because Russia is a member of the UN Security Council and has the right of veto. And that is why the UN Security Council will allow exclusively those “peacekeepers” that will be beneficial to Russia. Ukraine will have no influence on the configuration of the “peacekeepers” whatsoever.
The UN does not have its own armed forces. Therefore, peacekeeping missions are formed from the armed forces of the UN member states that provide soldiers voluntarily. Do I need to explain from what country or its satellites the majority of “peacekeeper volunteers” under the cover of UN blue helmets will come?
Then the question is: who are the Russian “peacekeepers” going to reconcile with whom, since Ukraine does not recognize Russia as the one responsible for the occupation? Ukraine with DNR/LNR?
It’s not worth cherishing illusions: peacekeepers are not allies that will help us liberate the occupied territories. On the contrary, the arrival of peacekeepers means that the state renounces its function of defence and armed protection, and the task of peacekeepers is the disarmament of both sides.
And now let’s imagine that the “peacekeepers” selected by Russia enter the territory of Ukraine and start disarming the Ukrainian army? What will be the reaction of our soldiers? The history of the use of the peacekeeping forces has had enough examples when the “peacekeepers” provoked bloody massacres more efficiently than they restored peace.
Ukraine has already seen pacification. And it has seen its consequences.
Samopomich warns that no one will help Ukraine unless Ukraine starts calling things by their own names and protects its defenders, from Russian peacekeepers among other things.
Samopomich requires that the President should make a decision on the use of the Armed Forces of Ukraine in connection with the Russian aggression and occupation, and should submit this proposal to the parliament, as it is stipulated in the Constitution of Ukraine. Samopomich requires that the parliament should give consent to the use of the Armed Forces and urgently adopt a law recognizing the occupation of Ukrainian territories by the Russian Federation as the basis for the use of the Armed Forces.