Ukrainians like to assume moral superiority and use propaganda to cover up how they brought it all on themselves and how they reap what they sow - read here about it
Reading time: 35 minutes (38 minutes with footnotes)
Welcome to the peace initiative for Ukraine in which you can contibute by raising your awareness as well as your consciousness[+] and spirit to the modes[+] of neutrality[*], decency, respectfulness, wisdom[*], objectivity, mastery of the intellect, surrender (ego and mind to God’s will), and finally peace (inner then outer). To properly grasp everything, we recommend reading the articles of this peace initiative in the order that we[*] designed it, which is listed in the CONTENTS. So if you haven’t read the previous articles, we urge you to do it, please. With this article we continue “The Roots of the Crisis in Ukraine” segment of this peace initiative, where we discuss Russia’s Role and Ukraine’s Role, as well as the Trigger Events.
There is a big difference between causing and starting a war. It is debatable, still, Russians may have started it with their SMO1[+] but Ukrainians and NATO caused and provoked it. There is a whole range of causes and provocations, ranging from Ukraine applying to join NATO and violating several treaties with Russia to tyrannizing the Russian ethnic minority but in this context, we will discuss only the root causes.
In this context, we will not discuss how NATO caused the war (this is explained in other articles[*][*]), as this was only possible because Ukrainians allowed them to interfere – although, why did Ukrainians did that can be traced back to the US psyop[+][+].
The most fatal mistake that Ukrainians did, which caused this war (and their existential crisis unless they accept this or any other rational proposal), is to foolishly think they could violate treaties[*] with Russia and terrorize[»] Russian ethnic minorities and get away with it without facing the consequences. In other (metaphorical) words, to think they could poke a bear and not get eaten or harmed. This is arrogance! If not stupidity.
Understandably, Ukrainians felt a need to retaliate for Crimean Russians deciding to secede and rejoin Russia and for Donbas Russians wanting to do the same (after being severely discriminated against – the Russian language being banned, their people being persecuted, terrorized, killed, even burned to death in Odesa, and so on) but what Ukrainians fail to acknowledge is their fault for why Russian ethnic minorities wanted to secede and why they turned to Russia for help. Also, irrationally, Ukrainians believe they are allowed to turn to the West2 and get military support from it but according to them, Russian ethnic minorities were not allowed to turn to Russia for support – work it out for yourselves if that is double standards or plain insanity.
United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights, Austrian lawyer Volker Türk explains here[»][+] indirectly how the governments’ violations of basic human rights led to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza: “It is the cynical disregard for human rights, and the failure to respect and heed warnings on human rights that has got us here.”
It is Kyiv regime's3 violations of human rights of ethnic minorities since February 2014 that led to the protests and conflict that led to the war in Ukraine. Ukraine's ambition to join NATO (and place anti-Russian troops across Russian border and expel Russian navy from Crimea) has been an issue since 2008 but it escalated into an armed conflict after ethnic Russians protested the new illegitimate anti-Russian US puppet regime in 2014 that in February voted in parliament to prohibit a free use of Russian language.
Besides the arguments and evidence provided in this article, we also compiled a list of Ukrainian provocations that caused this war. In this and the next article we will provide all the necessary evidence how Ukraine caused this war and we will group them in three main categories:
Keen to shift blame for everything on Russia or anyone else, as usual Ukraine blamed Russia for violating or breaking agreements with Ukraine but what Kyiv deliberately omits to mention is that it was Ukraine that broke those agreements first!!! We will now proceed to list some of them with evidence but it is necessary to first point out that, by law, Russia was not obliged to keep the agreements that Ukraine broke, therefore Russia broke no law – it was Ukraine that broke the law by breaking its legally binding agreements. The principle of reciprocity in the Law of Treaties dictates that the injured party (in this case Russia) should not be called upon to comply with its obligations under the treaty when the other party (in this case Ukraine) fails to comply with those obligations which it undertook under the same treaty. In other words, legally, Russia was not obliged to comply with its obligations under any treaty as soon as Ukraine failed to comply with it.
Here is the list of some of the agreements that Ukraine broke:
1️⃣ Ukraine violated several provisions of The Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation, and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation[+][+](signed in 1997), including:
Article 6 of the Treaty[+], prescribed that both parties “shall not conclude any treaties with third countries against the other Party. Neither Party shall allow its territory to be used to the detriment of the security of the other Party.” In 2008, Ukraine applied to join The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO)[+], which is a treaty against Russia and would entail Ukrainian territory to be used to the detriment of the security of Russia. Furthermore, in June 2017, Ukrainian parliament passed a law making integration with NATO a foreign policy priority[+], and on 7 February 2019, parliament amended[+][+] the Constitution to state Ukraine's strategic objective as joining the NATO.
Also, in 2013 Ukrainians planned to sign the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement[+] and in March 2014, they signed it, choosing closer ties with the EU rather than the EAEU (Eurasian Economic Union and Customs Union[+]), which was prohibiting Ukraine to trade with Russia, which was obviously turning Ukraine against Russia – it would lose a lot of money and all the benefits as a Ukrainian main trade partner
Article 12 of the Treaty, prescribed that Ukraine “shall protect the ethnic, cultural, linguistic and religious diversity of ethnic minorities in their territory and shall create conditions that encourage such diversity; andshall guarantee the right of persons belonging to ethnic minorities, individually or together with other persons belonging to ethnic minorities, freely to express, preserve and develop their ethnic, cultural, linguistic or religious diversity and promote and develop their culture without being subjected to any attempts to assimilate them against their will.” Ukraine adopted several discriminatory offensive laws against the Russian language and the rights of Russian speakers in Ukraine. Already on 23 February 2014, the new unelected Kyiv regime made a proposal in the Ukrainian parliament to abolish the language law[+][+][+] (that granted regional status to the Russian language) so as to prohibit the use of Russian language in courts, schools, and other government institutions.
The preamble of the Treaty, which states that the ‘strengthening of friendly relations, good-neighborliness and mutually beneficial cooperation corresponds to the vital interests of their peoples and serves the cause of peace and international security’ – the events of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, in particular, the hostile treatment of the Russian ethnic minority (many of whom were also Russian citizens, had dual citizenship), undeniably violated the preamble.
2️⃣ Ukraine violated also Article 60(3) of the Law of Treaties (VCLT) – when in 2014, Ukrainian opposition illegally stormed the Presidential Administration building and the Cabinet building (1 December 2013), illegally seized the Kyiv City Hall (1 December 2013 - 16 February 2014), and the parliament building, the president's administration quarters, the Cabinet building, and the Interior Ministry (since 21 February 2014) and unlawfully ousted the Prime Minister and President of Ukraine, who were of Russian ethnic minority, and for many months paraded hostility and discrimination toward Russian Ukrainians, “the violation of a provision essential to the accomplishment of the object or purpose of the treaty” has occurred.
Since Ukraine violated several provisions of the Treaty, the principle of reciprocity in the Law of Treaties dictates that the injured party (in this case Russia) should not be called upon to comply with its obligations under the treaty when the other party (in this case Ukraine) fails to comply with those obligations which it undertook under the same treaty. In other words, legally, Russia was not obliged to comply with its obligations under the treaty as soon as Ukraine failed to comply in 2008 and later again and again. In 2018, Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko signed a decree not to extend the treaty[+], which is why this treaty was officially no longer in effect after 2018. By cancelling the Treaty agreements in 2018, Kyiv shot itself in the foot because since then, Russians had no obligation stick to their part of the deal – to honor Ukraine’s territorial integrity and acknowledge the inviolability of the borders.
3️⃣ Ukraine violated also Partition Treaty on the Status and Conditions of the Black Sea Fleet[+][+] signed in 1997 and prolonged in 2010 with the Kharkiv Pact[+][+], which determined the status of Russian military presence in Crimea based on the agreements recorded in the 1997 Treaty on Friendship[+][+]. Ukraine agreed to lease Crimean naval facilities to Russia until 2042, with an automatic 5 years renewal option in exchange for Russia to pay a $100 million annual fee, respect the sovereignty of Ukraine, and provide it with discounted Russian natural gas (30% price reduction[+]). The cost of this pact for Russia, or Ukraine's gain, was $40 billion[+]. Ukraine had no costs, just gains.
So, Russian military was legally in Crimea ever since 1783. In 1954, although Crimea belonged to Russia and was governed by Moscow in the Soviet Union, it was ascribed to Kyiv administration4under the condition that Moscow continues to govern it (together with all other USSR territories, including the whole of Ukraine). The only reason Russia allowed Ukraine to have Russian Crimea was the naivety that Ukraine would appreciate it and honor its obligations and agreements.
So, in 2008 (or at any time due to Ukraine's Declaration of Independence where also neutrality is enshrined), Ukraine had no right to apply to join NATO also because part of Ukrainian territory (Crimea) was leased to Russian military (it is impossible for the two enemies or rivals to share Crimea's military bases). Also, in 2014, the new anti-Russian US-puppet regime5, which came to power by violence rather than democratic means and which ousted all ethnic Russian (Crimea's) representatives in government, signaled6 that it would reapply to join NATO and terminate that treaty, which it also followed through as it made joining NATO a priority[+][+][+][+], proving Russia's concerns valid.
Already during the presidency of US puppet Victor Yushchenko (2005–2010), the Ukrainian government declared that the lease would not be extended and that the fleet would have to leave Crimea by 2017 but he was replaced in 2010 when the Treaty was extended until 2042 by President Yanukovych, who was then violently ousted in 2014 and forced to flee the country under death threats of US-backed nationalists.
On 26 February 2014, then-NATO Secretary-General Rasmussen reaffirmed[+] that NATO doors are open to Ukraine. Therefore, considering all these anti-Russian developments, both Crimea residents (mostly ethnic Russians) and Russians took decisive action in March 2014 to hinder NATO and US troops to be stationed there and take over their rightful place. It is, of course, impossible for the adversaries, Russia and NATO, to share military bases. Logically, Russia would not allow the US to kick it out of its rightful place, so it annexed Crimea AFTER the Crimea residents voted in a referendum to separate from Ukraine and rejoin Russia.
On 31 March 2014, couple days after the annexation of Crimea, Russia’s State Duma7 unanimously approved the repeal of these Russian-Ukrainian agreements whereby officially terminating the legal effect of the Partition Treaty, a.k.a. Kharkiv Pact. US-puppet regime had made the pact untenable after it breached the other Treaty on Friendship and failed to pay its debt to Russia for gas. As it states in the Partition Treaty's Article 1, the pact was not determined just by this Agreement but also other agreements between the Parties, which Ukraine violated first. As it states in the Kharkiv Pact “developing relations are based on the principle of strategic partnership recorded in the 1997 Treaty on Friendship, Cooperation and Partnership between Ukraine and the Russian Federation”, which Ukraine violated first.
The threats of Ukraine joining NATO and allowing NATO troops in Crimea was inacceptable for Russia and also, pact was not fulfilled by Ukraine's side as it did not pay for gas in full as agreed per that pact. Ukraine’s debt to Russian Gazprom8 had risen to $4,5 billion[+][+]. After Ukraine's violations, the Partition Treaty or Kharkiv Pact was no longer catering to Russia’s interests, especially after annexation of Crimea, the pact became redundant, therefore, Russia terminated it right after annexation.
4️⃣ Ukraine violated the Agreement on settlement of political crisis in Ukraine[+] signed on 21 February 2014, during Maidan Revolution. This was an agreement between the then-President of Ukraine, Viktor Yanukovych, and the leaders of Ukraine's parliamentary opposition via the mediation of the European Union and Russia. This was not an agreement between Ukraine and Russia but between the Ukraine’s President and opposition leaders – we mention it here to highlight the fact that those West-backed, anti-Russian opposition leaders came to power couple days later by force and by breaking this legally binding agreement and started the armed conflict (war) in Donbas less than two months later! Nevertheless, Western powers kept backing these deceitful leaders and helped them overthrow the democratically elected government, which was in keeping with their global practice of regime change by force in the attempt to impose their own geopolitical vision on Ukraine and the rest of the world.
The agreement[+] was to form an interim unity government, constitutional reforms to reduce the president's powers, and early elections. Protesters were to hand over their weapons to the Ministry of Interior, refrain from the use of violence and leave all occupied administrative and public buildings and unblock streets, city parks and squares, and the government would not apply a state of emergency. This agreement to resolve the political crisis was signed by the President of Ukraine Viktor Yanukovych and opposition (revolutionary) leaders Vitali Klitschko, Arseniy Yatsenyuk, and Oleh Tyahnybok, and formally witnessed by the Foreign Ministers of Germany, Poland, and France9. The Special Representative of the President of the Russian Federation, who participated in the discussions, was not party10 to the agreement because this was Ukraine’s domestic issues and not an international agreement between two states, Ukraine and Russia – there was nothing for Russia to implement in this agreement.
Although President Yanukovych agreed to all demands of the opposition and complied with it by immediately ordering all police forces to withdraw from the capital, some aggressive far-right paramilitary commanders (Parasyuk, Yarosh, etc., who were excluded from negotiations because they were not leaders of political parties), did not agree to it as they insisted on President's immediate resignation. That evening11, on the Maidan stage, they made an official and direct threat[»][»][»] to his life and the lives of his loved ones. Parasyuk12 declared[+]Maidan's ultimatumthreatening and vowing to attack and drive Yanukovych away using weapons if he didn't resign by 10 am next day, which was met by the mob ovations and applause. This is the type of regime change that the West backed and funded – overthrowing a democratically elected government – this exposes their phony narrative of “defending democracy”.
Yanukovych did not yield to the criminal threats of those outlaws, so he did not resign but fearing for his life, he fled and sought protection from Russia. He was forced out of the office despite agreeing to all demands of the opposition, which is telling of new regime’s depravity. Nevertheless, he was still the legitimate President of Ukraine, at least until the snap presidential election in May 201413[+]. The opposition had no legal right to remove him without an impeachment process and hold the election in May. He was never impeached because there was no legal ground for it and there was no sufficient number of votes in the parliament needed to approve the impeachment process. On 1 March 2014, he sent an official letter[+] to Russian President Vladimir Putin requesting him to use Russia's military to restore law and order in Ukraine. Yanukovych could legally authorize an armed intervention from Russia during his trip to Russia.
The opposition leaders – Klitschko, neo-Nazi[»][ꚛ]Yatsenyuk, and neo-Nazi[ꚛ][+][+][»] Tyahnybok, who were signatories of that agreement, did not keep any of their promises[+] at all. They agreed and signed that their people would refrain from the use of violence, hand over their weapons to the Ministry of Interior, and leave all occupied administrative and public buildings and unblock streets, city parks and squares. Such untrustworthy leaders, who never implemented the agreement to disarm and vacate all the occupied places, went on to become the non-legitimate lawmakers as they took power by force then – Yatsenyuk became the Prime Minister and Klitschko has become the mayor of Kyiv to this day while Tyahnybok14 run for president in the May 2014 presidential election. It is that unelected bunch that started the illegal armed conflict[+] against the pro-government ethnic-Russian protesters in Donbas in April 2014[»]. Ukrainians were killing Ukrainians in what was a civil war. The victims were mostly ethnic-Russian civilians who had no one else to protect them but Russia.
NATO leaders wanted a regime change to serve their economic and geopolitical interests, so instead of condemning the opposition for fully15 violating the agreement and threatening the President with weapons despite the agreement, US permanent representative to the UN Samantha Power ludicrously said[+]: "It was Yanukovych who violated the terms of this Agreement, after leaving Kyiv, and then Ukraine" – but there was no agreement that he had to stay in Kyiv, especially not under conditions of armed mob threatening to kill him! He also fully complied with the agreement by immediately ordering all police forces to withdraw and did not impose a state of emergency as agreed, which revolutionary took advantage of by seizing presidential residence and another government building. He left Ukraine AFTER all that!
5️⃣ Ukraine violated not one but two Minsk Agreements[+] signed in 2014 and 2015 – they signed those agreements not with Russia but with Russian ethnic minorities in Donbas, still, Russians, including Putin, were part of the negotiations and they bragged how they fooled[+] Putin with it. Ukrainian and EU officials gave false promises to oblige Ukraine to implement the provisions of the Minsk Agreements that were designed to prevent the war but they never meant to honor these agreements and instead it was only meant to buy time for NATO to militarize Ukraine to fight Russia – as former German Chancellor (2005-2021) Angela Merkel[+]and former French President (2012-2017) Francois Hollande[][][+][] as well as then-Ukrainian President Poroshenko[+][+] admitted it. Also Zelensky admitted[+] that he sabotaged Minsk peace deal with Russia and here[»] is he recorded ridiculing the Minsk Accords in 2019 in Paris. Pro-Ukraine OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine reported violations on both sides but ethnic Russians were only defending themselves in their homeland while the neo-Nazi battalions recruited by the Kyiv regime were the aggressors there, coming from other regions of Ukraine. In mid-February 2022 (before Russian SMO[+]), OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine reported[+] a massive spike in Ukrainians shooting at Russian ethnic minorities in Donbas, thus on 13 February 2022, OSCE had to withdraw from Donbas due to deteriorating security conditions as Ukraine was violating the Minsk accords.
6️⃣ Ukraine violated also the Charter for European Security Organization for Security and Co-operation[+] – like all other participants, Ukraine signed the Charter at the OSCE Summit in 1999 and reconfirmed it in the 2010 OSCE Summit[+]: Ukraine will not strengthen its security at the expense of the security of other States, including Russia. Strengthening Ukrainian security since 2014 with many other OSCE states massively militarizing Ukraine to kill Russians[»][+][»][»] came at the expense of the security of Russia, which was a huge violation of that treaty and international law.
7️⃣ Ukraine also violated its obligations under the Geneva Statement[+] “on the situation in Ukraine” signed on the 17 April 2014 by Russia, the United States, the European Union and Ukraine, which requested an end to any violence as the most urgent step. The Geneva Statement came out of Russia-US bilateral negotiations, which Russia had initiated. The EU and the Ukrainian government became add-on signatories. Technically, the Geneva document does not stipulate any specific obligations for Russia. It only envisages certain steps to be taken within Ukraine. With its continuous so-called “anti-terrorism operation”[+] in Donbas, using neo-Nazi battalions to attack and kill civilians in Ukraine violated these provisions[+]:
“All sides must refrain from any violence, intimidation or provocative actions. The participants strongly condemned and rejected all expressions of extremism, racism and religious intolerance, including anti-semitism.”
8️⃣ Ukraine violated also its own 1991 Declarations of Independence and Sovereignty[+][+][+] – Ukraine also violated Kyiv's promises enshrined in its Declarations which contain the commitment that they will stay neutral. The declaration (with a preamble and ten chapters[+]) proclaims[+][+] that Ukraine is "a permanently neutral state that does not participate in military blocs." That means that according to it, Ukraine had right to choose its own security arrangements but no right to join NATO or any other military alliance, if it expected Russia to oblige to their part of the deal to respect Ukraine's territorial integrity.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated in September 2023[»][+]:
“Of course, in 1991, we recognized the sovereignty of Ukraine on the basis of the Declaration of Independence[+][+][+], which Ukraine adopted when leaving the Soviet Union. The declaration contains many positive aspects, including the fact that they will respect the rights of citizens minorities, and the rights of the Russian language[+] and other languages. Then all this was included in the constitution of Ukraine. But in the Declaration of Independence, one of the main points[+][+] for us was that Ukraine would be a non-aligned country and would not enter into any military alliance. In that version, under those conditions, we support the territorial integrity of Ukraine.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin also spoke[+] about the principled nature of Ukraine's neutral status: "Kiev gained its independence and autonomy during the collapse of the Soviet Union on the basis of a declaration of independence, and in this declaration it was written in black and white that Ukraine is a neutral state[+][+]. This is of fundamental importance for us.”
Law Breaking by Ukraine
Ukrainians are big on assuming moral superiority over Russia, which we already proved as inappropriate in the article on Fallacy That Ukraine Is Defending Morality as well as with evidence above exposing them for violating several treaties with Russians, the OSCE Charter, obligations under the Geneva Statement, and its own Declarations of Independence and Sovereignty, and here we will top it all by pointing out some laws they also broke.
In the Western media there is a constant talk about Russia breaking laws but rarely any about Ukraine breaking laws on even a greater scale. Therefore, we took it upon ourselves to pinpoint some of them, so as to balance the information. If we ought to condemn Russians for breaking laws, then we should do the same for Ukraine, too.
Also, it is important to consider the principle of reciprocity in law, whereby ethnic Russians and Russia were not obliged to comply any longer with their obligations under any legal documents, which Ukraine violated first, which means they were not breaking law. So, most of accusations of Russia breaking some laws are invalid.
For instance, Kyiv regime and their allies insist that referendums on independence of Crimea in March 2014, Donetsk and Luhansk regions in May 201416, and Zaporozhzhia and Kherson in September 2022 “contravened the Constitution of Ukraine and international norms and standards”[+] but they omit to consider that the new Kyiv government was the first that violated and ditched the Constitution! In other words, regions where ethnic Russians are a majority are not allowed to violate the Constitution but all other regions are – well, double standards are not acceptable under international law!
Also, since 23 February 2014, the new Ukrainian government started violating the human rights of ethnic minorities by pushing anti-ethnic minorities laws, such as major restrictions in using their language, which ethnic Russians opposed and were therefore, in April 2014, declared as terrorists whereby the new unelected regime sent neo-Nazi battalions and other National Guard units to kill them, including civilians and children.
Apart from aforementioned violations of legally binding agreements, here's a verified list of Ukraine's violations of human rights and international law since the US-backed Maidan revolution in 2014, before Russia launched its SMO on 24 February 2022:
➡ During Nov. 2013-Feb. 2014 Euromaidan protests and Maidan revolution the opposition leaders who then become a new illegitimate government broke several international and domestic laws by illegally seizing and occupying public and administrative buildings in cities and towns as well as using violence to overthrow a legitimate government by force. Anti-Russian leaders and members of the Maidan armed groups committed an increasing number of human rights abuses, such as abductions, harassment, and unlawful detentions, in particular of pro-Russian government officials, activists, and journalists.
➡ Ukrainians violated their Constitution and a decision of the Constitutional Court[+]. The revolutionaries or putschists who took power over the parliament by force in February 2014 changed the Ukrainian constitution, returning to an earlier version of it, in order to legitimize their coup. These changes were signed and published by Turchynov, who acted as chairman of the Rada, which was illegal because until the publication of this new constitution in an official way, Turchynov was not entitled to validate it by his signature. It was up to Prime Minister, Mykola Azarov, to validate it. Moreover, the parliament adopted these constitutional changes with a resolution, not a law, which is also contrary to the Ukrainian constitution. Moreover, these amendments were based on a 2004 law which the Ukrainian Constitutional Court had invalidated, which means this law was invalid and so these amendments were illegal. The execution of the decisions of the Constitutional Court of Ukraine is compulsory in the territory of Ukraine and these decisions are final and without appeal. Thus, not only did the new Ukrainian authorities quash the constitution, but also a decision of the Constitutional Court, which alone is empowered to decide what is constitutional or not.
➡ Ukrainians further violated their Constitution and international law by illegally impeaching the President Yanukovych, which means that then the new snap elections three months later (25 May 2014) were illegal and the successors were an illegitimate regime, nevertheless, the NATO states recognized the regime as legitimate because it was its puppet regime.
Article 111 of the Ukrainian Constitution states that "The President of Ukraine may be removed from office ... by hte majority of the constitutional composition of the ... Verkhovna Rada (Parliament) of Ukraine by the procedure of impeachment, in the event that he or she commits state treason or other crime." There was no majority (three-quarters or 75% is mandatory) parliamentary vote and no procedure of impeachment[+] that could legally remove President Yanukovych (ethnic Russian) from office before or after he was forced into exile, and no court had issued a verdict of treason or any other crime against him at the time, therefore, the overthrow was unconstitutional and illegal.
On 22 February 2014, parliamentary voting officially removed Yanukovych from the post of president of Ukraine on the grounds that he “was unable to fulfill his duties and to hold early presidential elections on May 25”. In legal terms, these grounds are unconstitutional or illegal as according to the Ukrainian Constitution, apart from death and health reasons, a President could be removed only by the impeachment on the grounds of committing state treason or other crime, and he had to be convicted of it by Court and not by the members of the opposition! Moreover, according to Ukraine Constitution, removal required that at least three-quarters of parliament’s “constitutional membership” vote in favor of removal. Three-quarters or 75% were 338 votes that were needed to remove a president but only 328 members of parliament voted for removal, which was about 73% votes. From a legal point of view, the vote to remove him failed, which means he was removed unconstitutionally. Find out more here[+][+][+].
Pro-Yanukovych deputies were beaten and threatened[+] so they either voted ‘correctly’ or did not attend the Rada session of impeachment; a process that did not even exist in Ukraine’s constitution.
➡ The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Report[+]17 on the human rights situation in Ukraine on 15 May 2014 also reported irregularities during campaigning for the May 2014 Presidential elections as some candidates reported arbitrary restrictions, conflicts and incidents, which impacted and curtailed their ability to campaign with voters – all this makes the election invalid under international law but because the results pleased the NATO countries, no one other than Russia objected it.
There were many issues of constitutionality and legitimacy of the 2014 election, which the Western community disregarded because the results suited them, as a pro-EU government was instituted. The turnout was lower as the law prescribes for the election to be legitimate. According to Ukrainian laws, a snap election must have a voter turnout higher than 50%, which was not the case, therefore the results of this election should be deemed invalid. Less than half of the legitimate voters turned out to vote – the total number of voters was around 35.5 million but only around 18 million people cast a ballot (they disregarded the law by disregarding or excluding the regions not under government control, so not counting Crimea and Donbas the turnout was 60% but it was against the law to calculate the turnout by excluding some regions). Also, pro-Russian voters were hindered to vote and run for the office. There were morally unacceptable electorate manipulations, such as disenfranchisement, voter intimidation, disinformation, corruption, banning assault, harassment or libel. For instance, in the pro-Russian Donbas region18, only 426 ballot stations were open for polling instead of all 2.430, disabling 80% of the Russophone19 Donbas population to cast a vote. This alone should have questioned the legitimacy of the elections. On top of that, as opposed to all previous elections, there were no well-known pro-Russian candidates in the elections as the established leaders were forced into exile or arrested on charges of leading a separatist movement (and after the elections cleared of charges in the absence of proof, which is telling of the real motive behind the arrestment). Also, the pro-Russian Party of Regions was the biggest party in Ukraine between 2006 and 2014 providing several Ukrainian Presidents and Prime Ministers but ahead of the 2014 elections, the party's symbol and activities were banned in many regions, thus they were illegally prevented to campaign in those regions. Some party members claimed to be victims of a political repression and persecution campaign organized by the new government, which resulted in the party being disintegrated.
➡ On 23 February 2014, the new US-backed unelected government (that came to power by force rather than by democratic means) illegally dismissed many (ethnic Russian20) Ministers and judges of the Supreme Council of Justice.
➡ Ukraine also violated international law and the United Nations Charter's norms on self-determination[+] as in years ahead of the Crimea referendum in March 2014, it didn't allow Crimeans to “freely determine their political status and freely pursue their economic, social and cultural development”. The right of a people to self-determination is a cardinal principle in modern international law, binding on the UN as an authoritative interpretation of the Charter's norms. Based on respect for the principle of equal rights and fair equality of opportunity, Crimeans have had the right to freely choose their sovereignty and international political status with no interference, especially for the reason that Crimea had the special status of the Autonomous Republic[+] and because at that time, Ukrainians overthrew their government and Constitution, at which time regional legislatures, such as that of Crimea and Donbas, became the only legal authorities. There are several models of self-determination through decentralization, greater autonomy, and secession. It is important to distinguish that regions with autonomous status[+] should have much greater rights for self-governing and self-determination than other regions. The 2014 referendum in Crimea was an exercise of peoples' right to internal self-determination via democratic free expression of the will of the Autonomous Republic's population. Therefore, if Kyiv regime denied them the right to hold a referendum, if the Crimeans could not make any important decisions without the approval of the central government, then they were robbed of their autonomy.
The definition of autonomy greatly varies between nations. In governmental parlance, autonomy refers to self-governance. According to the Encyclopedia of Global Justice[+], autonomy means not being under the control of another, and political autonomy[+] implies self-governing, thus not under the control of a higher level of government. According to the encyclopedia of Ukraine, autonomy[+] is a condition under which a sociopolitical entity determines its own laws – in other words, Crimea could determine its own laws without Kyiv, therefore, Kyiv's laws were not superior than Crimea's laws. Autonomy gives people more rights to self-determination, some legislative powers, and extra political liberties, so when those rights, powers, and liberties are violated and the majority of autonomous folk feel oppressed, discriminated and their human rights abused, under international law, they have the right to declare independence (as in the case of Kosovo) and join any other country they choose. Holding a referendum in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea[+] was not a violation of the Ukrainian Constitution and international law also because the referendum could not have been authorized by the central Ukraine government as at that time, Ukrainians overthrew their government and Constitution, at which time regional legislatures, such as that of Crimea and Donbas, became the only legal authorities. The self-appointed (or US-appointed[+][+][+][+]) new regime had no legal authority over Crimea or any other region. The Ukrainian Revolution had created an ‘extreme situation’ in which Crimea’s right to self-determination could not be exercised any longer in the undemocratic, illegal constitutional framework of Ukraine. Also, under international law, “remedial secession” is allowed in extreme cases of repeated oppression or subjugation of the minority, leaving it with no other option to exercise internal self-determination in a meaningful way but to then seek out its external self-determination.
➡ In the aftermath of the illegal overthrow of government, eight Yanukovych administration officials (ethnic Russians), including a former member of the Ukrainian parliament, were killed (allegedly, all have committed suicide, which cannot be right and, according to Newsweek[+], suggests Ukrainian wrongdoing), along with a string of suspicious deaths[+] of other Yanukovych allies (ethnic Russian officials, journalists, activists, etc.), which was all criminal activity by the new regime that assumed authority and brought down the law and order.
➡ The United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights Report[+] on the human rights situation in Ukraine on 15 May 2014 reported the erosion of law and order. It gives an example of the tragic events[+][+][+][»] that took place in Odesa on 2 May 2014, where then reportedly 46 (or 116[+]) peaceful people of Russian ethnicity were brutally murdered and burned alive in the Trade Union building while taking refuge from the violent mob, including hooligans and neo-Nazis, and to this day no one has been prosecuted for that although the felons are visible in many recordings. The law requires the perpetrators of the killings in Odesa to be brought to justice in a timely and impartial manner but Ukraine broke the law.
➡ On 23 February 2014, the new unelected US–puppet anti-Russian Kyiv regime attempted to abolish the language law[+][+][+] (that granted regional status to the Russian language) so as to prohibit the use of Russian language in courts, schools, and other government institutions. The violations of linguistic human rights was criticized by EU institutions[+], which is why it took several years, until 2018, for it to be passed even though it violates the rights of ethnic and linguistic minorities to enjoy their own culture and use their own language – Ukraine violated all that and it should be held accountable but NATO states are turning a blind eye to it because it harms the ethnic Russians, whom NATO perceives as their enemy.
➡ Ukraine's 2017 education law[+] made Ukrainian the required language of study in state schools from the fifth grade on, i.e. at the basic secondary and upper secondary levels, which is against the international human rights law that protects the linguistic rights of ethnic minorities.
➡ In September 2018, Lviv Oblast Council introduced a ban[+] on the public use of the Russian-language cultural products (movies, books, songs, etc.) throughout the Lviv region.Human rights activists and lawyers called the law illegal and unconstitutional[+], which was, therefore, overturned in January 2019 by a court.
➡ In April 2019, the Ukrainian parliament passed the law "On supporting the functioning of the Ukrainian language as the State language"[+][+]suppressing the use of Russian language, which is the native language and the only language they know for millions of Ukrainians, especially the ethnic Russians in south-eastern Ukraine, which is why they took it as an attempt at a cultural genocide[+]. In the last national census, 30%[+] of Ukrainians – 14,3 million people declared Russian as their native language.
Both this law and 2017 education law[+] violate even the Constitution of Ukraine as well as international law and regulations, as confirmed by appointed expert opinions of international committees and other bodies like the advisory body of the Council of Europe Venice Commission[+][+], UN High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR)[+], Human Rights Watch[+], OSCE[+], and European Parliament[+][+], all of whom condemned Ukraine for enacting the restrictive language and education laws that failed to safeguard minorities’ linguistic rights21[+]. Here are some of the international legal instruments and declarations that mandate the rights of ethnic, religious, and linguistic minorities to enjoy their own culture and use their own language[+], all of which Ukraine violated and for which should be held accountable:
European Charter for Regional or Minority Languages[+][+], ratified by Ukraine in 2003
International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights[+] – Article 27
Framework Convention for the Protection of National Minorities[+]
Universal Declaration of Linguistic Rights[+](1996) serves to promote international commitment to respecting the rights of linguistic groups as well as individuals who do not reside within their native communities.
Declaration on the Rights of Persons belonging to National, Ethnic, Religious and Linguistic Minorities[+]
Universal Declaration of the Collective Rights of Peoples
Ukraine violated those basic human rights by banning or restricting[+][+] Russian language in more than 30 spheres22 of public life, including public administration, electoral process, referendums, courts, schools/education, science, theatres and other culture, media, economic and social life, health and care institutions, activities of political parties etc.; Ukrainian language is mandatory for civil servants, soldiers, doctors, and teachers. The restrictive policies started since 2014 and culminated in 2019 with the language law[+] that prohibits employees of restaurants, cafes, bars, shops, banks, hospitals and other similar institutions from talking to visitors in Russian language[+], the citizen can no longer contact or send letters to the officials and authorities of higher levels in Russian language; identity documents can no longer be issued in Russian language...
➡ In November 2021, the 32nd report of the Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR) has issued its chronicle[+][+] of Ukrainian human rights violations against civilians in Donbas, which was just one of many such reports. As a result of the so-called “anti-terrorism operation”[+] against the natives of Donbas from April 2014[»] until 24 February 2024 when Russia launched its SMO, the Kyiv regime (under first Poroshenko and then Zelensky presidencies) illegally murdered around 14.000[+][+][+] civilians, wounded 54.000, displaced 2,6 million, and terrorized millions more.
then-President Poroshenko murdered thousands of ethnic Russian civilians with his neo-Nazi battalions that he incorporated into the National Guard
➡ The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) mission in Donbass issued daily reports, such as, for example, on 21 February 2022[+] confirming that Ukrainian militants violated international humanitarian law by shelling residential buildings in the Donetsk and Luhansk provinces.
Furthermore, Ukraine broke many international laws after Russia launched its SMO on 24 February 2022, so, here's an incomplete list with evidence:
➡ In March 2023, the UN Human Rights Office (OHCHR) issued a report[+] that recorded a significant increase in law violations by Ukrainian security forces since start of Russia’s special military operation. OHCHR documented 91 cases of enforced disappearances and arbitrary detentions[+] of civilians plus 88 Russian civilian sailors committed by Ukrainian armed forces and law enforcement agencies.
➡ Kyiv authorities violated the very basic rule of international humanitarian law enshrined in Article 48 of the Protocol Additional to the Geneva Conventions[+], and Relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts (Protocol I): the Parties to the conflict… shall direct their operations only against military objectives – on many occasions, which Western media hid from public or briefly reported by calling the civilian victims “Russian-backed separatists”[+], such as:
on 14 March 2022, when a Tochka-U tactical missile with a cluster warhead[ꚛ] was fired at a residential block in the center of Donetsk from the territory controlled by the Kyiv authorities. This assault led to the killing of 23 civilians while 37, including children, women and elderly people, were injured and taken to medical institutions.
On 8 April 2022, AFU23 carried out a “Tochka-U” air strike from the area of Dobropolye (45 km southwest of Kramatorsk) against the Kramatorsk railway terminal, killing 50 people, including 5 children. 98 people were taken to hospitals of Kramatorsk, including 16 children. Ukraine blamed Russia for it but Russian troops do not use “Tochka-U” tactical missile systems and it was later debunked[+][+][+][»].
On 6 July 2022, AFU committed another shelling of residential areas in Donetsk, killing 5 children.
On 12 July 2022, the Ukrainian artillery shelled Novaya Kakhovka, Kherson region from M142 HIMARS multiple launch rocket system that it had received from the USA, leaving seven people killed and more than 100 wounded.
On 29 July 2022, the Ukrainian artillery shelled Yelenovka, DPR, also from M142 HIMARS MLRS. As a result of a direct hit, one of the barracks of the DPR Penal Colony No. 120 (IK-120) was destroyed, leaving 50 people killed and about 100 wounded, mostly captured Ukrainian militants, which had been held in that penitentiary.
On 19 September 2022, the AFU shelled Kuybyshevsky district of Donetsk, leaving 13 killed including 2 children[+].
On 22 September 2022, the AFU shelled the Central Market in Donetsk with 6 killed[+].
And the list goes on and on. Also, Ukrainian and Western media only reported how Russians hit the energy infrastructure but never about Ukrainians doing it in Russian controlled areas, leaving civilians without energy supply, including hitting the nuclear plant ZNPP many times, risking a nuclear catastrophe[+].
➡ In August 2022, Amnesty International published a study[+][+] and a tweet[+] revealing that since the start of the war in February, Ukrainian forces have endangered civilians by establishing bases in schools and hospitals and operating weapons systems in civilian areas, which is a violation of international law.
➡ In December 2022, OSCE ODIHR reported[+] violations of international humanitarian law and international human rights law in territory under Ukraine’s effective control. It had documented many allegations of unlawful killings, arbitrary arrest and detention, deprivation of liberty, enforced disappearance, and torture and other ill-treatment of individuals alleged to have ‘collaborated’ with Russian Federation authorities, as well as sexual violence committed by Ukrainian armed forces, law enforcement, or members of territorial defence units
➡ In March 2022, the international human rights organization Human Rights Watch, which investigates and documents human rights violations, warned[+] that the treatment of prisoners of war by the Ukrainian authorities is serious violation of international humanitarian law. According to the Geneva Convention of 1949 on the Treatment of Prisoners of War, the detaining party bears full responsibility for the prisoner, moreover, undertakes to provide him with humane treatment.
Besides the arguments and evidence provided in this article, we also compiled a list of Ukrainian provocations that caused this war.
If you need more evidence that Ukrainians have no right to assume moral superiority over Russians, please refer to our article on Fallacy That Ukraine Is Defending Morality
Thank you for reading this article and participating in this peace initiative by raising your awareness and, hopefully, your consciousness and spirit. To properly grasp everything, we[*]recommend reading the articles of this peace initiative for Ukraine in the proper order, which is listed in the Contents. So if you haven’t read the previous articles, we recommend that you do. When you are ready, please proceed to the next article in this part on “How Did Ukrainians Cause the War” in the “The Roots of the Crisis in Ukraine” segment: Low Level of Consciousness and Related Destructive Actions
we refer to Kyiv as a regime[+] due to its oppressive and repressive policies, corruption, and foul treatment of its ethnic minorities, such as the ethnic Russians, violating their human rights, tyrannizing, and killing them since 2014.
geographical location made it easier for Kyiv to run the administration and logistics espacially because Ukraine provided Crimea with water and electricity. In 1954, Kakhovka Dam was being built since 1950 in Ukr which was going to supply water for Crimea.
Moscow refers[+] to Kyiv as a regime due to its oppressive and repressive policies, corruption, and foul treatment of its ethnic minorities, such as the ethnic Russians, violating their human rights, tyrannizing, and killing them since 2014.
not the interim government (which had no legal right to do it) but the nationalists who came to power and were running campaigns for the upcoming election said they would change the legislation in which Ukraine is a non-aligned state, which they did change
just like the Foreign Ministers of Germany and Poland, and France's head of the Department for Continental Europe of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs - they all together formally witnessed the agreement but none of them were signatories of it
Parasyuk is a Ukrainian military commander and far-right member of parliament from 2014-2019; agreement signatories Klitschko, Yatsenyuk, and Tyahnybok stood behind him on the Maidan stage
although in that Agreement the election date was set to be between September - December 2014 - after Constitutional reform that was agreed to be completed in September 2014
Tyahnybok run for president in the 2014 presidential election but got only 1% of the vote (Poroshenko won). In the October 2014 parliamentary election, his party party did not overcome the 5% threshold to win seats, thus he was not re-elected into parliament
the two republics declared independence during the time when government was overthrewn by force and new US-backed regime took power, on 11 May, right after Odesa massacre, and before the presidential election on 25 May 2014
we already explained how the UN is hijacked by NATO, so all UN institutions serve NATO interests and in this NATO proxy war against Russia they serve to vilify Russia. So as not to lose all credibility, they report on Ukraine's law-breaking but only mildly
Donbas[+] is a coal mining region that was part of eastern Ukraine from 1922-2022 (now part of Russia) consisting of two Republics - Donetsk and Luhansk - where most residents have been Russians for centuries. In 2022, after Bolsheviks defeated the Ukrainian nationalists, Lenin gave that part of former Russian Empire with mostly ethnic Russian residents to the Soviet Republic of Ukraine under condition that it remains part of the Soviet Union and under Moscow governance (Kyiv administration) but in 1991, Ukraine violated that agreement by breaking off from the Soviet Union and from Moscow, and since 2014, Ukrainians had been demolishing all Lenin's monuments, therefore they have no rights to claim the territories he conditionally granted them. Since Ukrainians hate Lenin and Stalin so much that they demonize them, then in the Russian view[+], it is only fair to give back all the land[ꚛ] that Lenin and Stalin allocated to Soviet Ukraine, without even asking the locals’ permission (the majority were Russians in Donbas).
according to the last census[+], Ukraine had around 30% ethnic Russians, mostly in the eastern and southern territories that used to belong to Russia for centuries but were assigned to Ukraine during the USSR under condition that Moscow continues to govers it
Linguistic rights[+] include, among others, the right to one's own language in legal, administrative, and judicial acts, language education, and media in a language understood and freely chosen by those concerned.
30 spheres of public life: public administration, electoral process, referendums, courts, schools/education, science, theatres and other culture, media, economic and social life, health and care institutions, activities of political parties, and many more
![[+]](https://www.virtuology.biz/images/consciousness-scale.png){kind=link}
![[ꚛ]](https://voidnetwork.gr/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/s0sR7dL.jpg){kind=link}
![[ꚛ]](https://bigthink.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/Cropped-Ukraine.png){kind=link}