Ukraine Invasion Part 14

[MagicFox]

New thread

www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/denmark-to-join-possible-peacekeeping-mission-in-ukraine/

Code;
Ibrahim/ I

She's/ he

Always so that suggests different things.
Bottom line unofficially if people want to fight they can?
They can't legally go into Ukraine but can perhaps under the guise of a peace keeping mission?

@PaperTyger

Always so that suggests different things. Bottom line unofficially if people want to fight they can? They can't legally go into Ukraine but can perhaps under the guise of a peace keeping mission?

Danish response to- Poland's government said an international peace keeping mission needs to be carried out.

[quote Alwayscheerful]www.euractiv.com/section/politics/short_news/denmark-to-join-possible-peacekeeping-mission-in-ukraine/[/quote]
That's interesting, I hadn't realised that individual nations couldn't choose to act independently of NATO.

What does peacekeeping look like?

Op, not sure?
What do you think?

With Chechen forces fighting door to door in mariapol and thousands trapped under rubble in the theatre I'd say, it should look like an encirclement of that theatre by peace keeping troops to aid the rescue and evacuation of those innocents?

Then a peacekeeping corridor to evacuate any other people who want to leave?

Same for other cities?

If Putin want's to stop the safe evacuation of innocents then they fire back .

Caveat.

I know such post's are jumped on, it's Just an off the top of my head suggestions that is guessing .

I’m not sure if I’m being stupid here but how are the peace talks being used as a way to regroup when Ukraine hasn’t stopped fighting. Am I missing something? It doesn’t appear they have taken the foot of the pedal so to speak. Yes Russia hasn’t stopped shelling but I just assume that with all wars they will continue to fight while the peace talks are ongoing?

It's weird re NATO.

As far as I thought countries had to be attacked and trigger article 5
So individual countries can go in on their own terms, but have safety in the knowledge that if things get to dicey, they have NATO to call on.

@PaperTyger

Op, not sure? What do you think?

With Chechen forces fighting door to door in mariapol and thousands trapped under rubble in the theatre I'd say, it should look like an encirclement of that theatre by peace keeping troops to aid the rescue and evacuation of those innocents?

Then a peacekeeping corridor to evacuate any other people who want to leave?

Same for other cities?

If Putin want's to stop the safe evacuation of innocents then they fire back .

Caveat.

I know such post's are jumped on, it's Just an off the top of my head suggestions that is guessing .

I have no idea. It sounds like one of those potential escalatory 'mistakes' that can happen eg if they were targeted 'accidentally'. The way Putin has been so far (totally indiscriminate) I can't imagine him not doing this!

@PaperTyger

It's weird re NATO.

As far as I thought countries had to be attacked and trigger article 5
So individual countries can go in on their own terms, but have safety in the knowledge that if things get to dicey, they have NATO to call on.

I know, it sounds like too much of a grey area for my liking!

@PaperTyger

It's weird re NATO.

As far as I thought countries had to be attacked and trigger article 5
So individual countries can go in on their own terms, but have safety in the knowledge that if things get to dicey, they have NATO to call on.

From my understanding having just read through how article 5 works, allies can decide how to respond to an attack on a NATO member state. The assistance doesn't necessarily have to be military- it has to be designed to 'restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.' So I just don't know what would happen if an independent peacekeeping mission prompted an attack on, say, Denmark. I'm still not clear on whether countries can act independently.

Whether Russian attacks on peacekeeping troops would trigger article 5 apparently depends on where that happens. Article 5 triggers if the attack occurs in an area where member states had occupying forces when the treaty came into effect.

www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm

So peace keeping forces in Ukraine may not trigger article 5.

I guess re mistakes that make's it Putin call to Risk then.

@PaperTyger

But in sure I read they can be attacked and not trigger article 5 . it's their choice.

Twitter rumblings of Danish peace keeping forces going in.

FWIW Article 5 verbatim….

“The Parties agree that an armed attack against one or more of them in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all and consequently they agree that, if such an armed attack occurs, each of them, in exercise of the right of individual or collective self-defence recognised by Article 51 of the Charter of the United Nations, will assist the Party or Parties so attacked by taking forthwith, individually and in concert with the other Parties, such action as it deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.

Any such armed attack and all measures taken as a result thereof shall immediately be reported to the Security Council. Such measures shall be terminated when the Security Council has taken the measures necessary to restore and maintain international peace and security”

@PaperTyger

So peace keeping forces in Ukraine may not trigger article 5.

I guess re mistakes that make's it Putin call to Risk then.

That's my understanding. As to it being illegal for Denmark to get involved, I don't know whether that's because NATO countries can't act alone (but then that doesn't make sense really) or whether it's a law in Denmark specifically that it doesn't involve itself in overseas military action unless it does it as part of a defensive NATO response.

All this just highlights how little I know 😆 but it's prompted me to do some research later.

I don't know whether that's because NATO countries can't act alone

You’re going to need the lawyers on that one…..as a general point NATO countries certainly have acted alone in the past, but not within the geographical areas covered by the North Atlantic Treaty…

@notimagain

I don't know whether that's because NATO countries can't act alone

You’re going to need the lawyers on that one…..as a general point NATO countries certainly have acted alone in the past, but not within the geographical areas covered by the North Atlantic Treaty…

Ahhhhh ok that was the missing puzzle piece. Thank you!

Denmark is responding to a possible idea for an international peace keeping mission suggested by Poland, not saying it's going to act alone. Denmark was keen to play its part in such a mission should it happen.

@Snorkelface

Denmark is responding to a possible idea for an international peace keeping mission suggested by Poland, not saying it's going to act alone. Denmark was keen to play its part in such a mission should it happen.

I understand that, I was more just interested in whether NATO countries could theoretically act alone because it said in the linked article that it was illegal, which made me curious.

The Russians have apparently used a hypersonic missile
twitter.com/michaelh992/status/1505083495101702150

The #Russian Ministry of Defense claims to have used a Khinzal hypersonic missile to target an underground ammunition depot in the Ivano-Frankivsk region of western #Ukraine.

It's not clear what constitutes an attack or am I missing something.
So Putin rolls tanks into Poland is clear; an attack is in motion , article 5 can be triggered and everyone goes in.

But Denmark and Poland go into Ukraine as a peacekeeping force and get fired on , within Ukraine?

As an arm chair observer specific missions like this from individual countries surely must be a way around?
Less aggressive and provocation than a NATO invasion, which may or may not trigger nuclear mad.
Or gentle mission to aid stuck civilians.

In the current context (events on the ground in the last few days) IMHO the idea anybody, let alone a NATO power, can go into the Ukraine and force a cease fire/act as an enforcer of the peace is fanciful…

It may happen when both sides have realised they have no more to gain by fighting, and we are not there yet…

@PaperTyger

It's not clear what constitutes an attack or am I missing something. So Putin rolls tanks into Poland is clear; an attack is in motion , article 5 can be triggered and everyone goes in.

But Denmark and Poland go into Ukraine as a peacekeeping force and get fired on , within Ukraine?

As an arm chair observer specific missions like this from individual countries surely must be a way around?
Less aggressive and provocation than a NATO invasion, which may or may not trigger nuclear mad.
Or gentle mission to aid stuck civilians.

Except it's not being suggested as a mission by individual countries, it's being suggested as a NATO mission or under another grouping that hasn't been come up with yet. NATO led is the idea and where it's being proposed. Putin will interpret anything however he likes regardless of the use of the word Peace.

I think the problem with Danish or any other NATO troops going into Ukraine is that Putin will see it as a NATO attack and get rather grumpy. Presumably it would have to be agreed as part of peace talks.

The hypersonic missile seems to have been used a few days ago to punch into the underground weapons storage. The speed would give more penetration. The Russians have released news of the type of missile today to show us that they are using big boy rockets.

Pester I don't know how they go in but Putin is calling on the axis of evil troops to go in so...

Surely it's PR what things are named etc.
Maybe it's time for some push back.

I'e immediate ceasefire, individual countries are going in to rescue a b and c.

Peace, will not fire unless fired on, then Risk NATO.
Up to you Putin.