SENATE BILL: Senate Resolution on the 2014 Crimean Crisis (Amendment Vote)

[Sopranos Republican]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor: Senator Lumine

Senator, you may begin advocating for this. I believe this is appropriate for the Emergency slot.

[TNF]

I don't think it's appropriate to declare our "full support" for a government palling around with armed neo-Nazis, quite frankly.

[Lumine]

First of all, I'd like to thank the (Former) President Pro Tempore and the Vice-President for pushing this resolution for immediate discussion.

Well, I guess I have a lot to say about this one. One of the things I noted while observing the Senate for the past months is that there is a tendency to neglect foreign affairs (with the exception of bills like the Anti Imperialism Act), which pretty much leaves our SoEA as the only officeholder concerned with those affairs. I believe the Senate has to take stands on what's going on in the rest of the world, even if said stands are symbolic.

The Ukrainian government is not perfect, granted, and there is a high number of nationalistic and far-right members that we should observe very carefully. But then again, Russia faces the same issues (often in more extreme ways, like the horrible anti-gay laws), and now it's acting as an outright aggressor in the international stage. Regardless of the government, we as a nation have a compromise with international law, and we signed the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances back in 1994, which means that we are obliged to protect the independence and territorial integrity of Ukraine. If we do nothing, and if we allow that treaty to be declared void, we will also face negative consequences in the area of disarmament (specially nuclear disarmament).

The purpose of this resolution is to show our compromise with Ukraine and their desire to avoid being a Russian puppet and state our condemnation of the Russian acts of aggression involving Crimea, while at the same time leaving enough options open for the SoEA and the Special Envoy. That is why I did not add specific restrictions on Russia (although I recommend heavy economic sanctions).

[DC Al Fine]

Assuming Atlasia had the same scandal the USA did (the one discussing which opposition leaders would be "appropriate" for a new government) our nose is hardly clean on this matter. I'm inclined to stay out of it.

[Donerail]

I'd like to thank Sen. Lumine for introducing this legislation, and VP Matt for placing it in the emergency slot.

Currently, I'm just waiting for the SoEA to get back to me on a visa ban/asset freeze proposal for top leadership involved in creating this crisis. We'll be studying the impacts of broader sanctions against top Russian leadership and oligarchs at a later point.

One thing I would urge the Senate to do is approve an aid package to Ukraine to provide for loans, technical assistance, and development aid, as well as aid to help Ukraine to find an alternative source for natural gas. Indeed, liberalizing our own oil and gas export laws to help supply Europe would be a solution worth pursuing.

I'd suggest linking the aid to requiring Tatar-language schools, investments in rural communities, and recognition of Russian as an official language (a more radical idea, but one that's been proposed, is to use it as leverage to require the adoption of an anti-LGBT discrimination law to further separate Ukraine from Russia).

If we wish to prepare for the worst, it is also possible to include a provision allowing for free immigration from Crimea for those minorities who feel threatened by the occupation. We can also fast-track EU/NATO membership, either for Ukraine or for Georgia. We've already supported moving the G8 summit elsewhere and could additionally suspend the NATO-Russia Council. Military intervention, in my opinion, is off the table, though we could bolster defenses on the eastern frontiers of NATO (the Baltics, Poland, etc).

Those are the current options that are on the table for the Senate to consider. Choose wisely.

[Sec. of State Superique]

I'm backing the ban on visas and assets of top leaderships! I would also like to see this kind of aid proposed by Sjoyce to be inserted in the bill! A more detailed perspective will come later!

[President Tyrion]

"Full support" I think is a phrase I would rather not use, but I support the majority of the concrete proposals outlined, with respect to diplomatic relations and whatnot.

[Lumine]

"Full support" I think is a phrase I would rather not use, but I support the majority of the concrete proposals outlined, with respect to diplomatic relations and whatnot.

It seemed the best one to create the desired effect, but I can understand the misgivings on the current Ukranian government, so I wouldn't might a slight change. Perhaps "diplomatic support"? I could add a fourth section as well outlining the aid package and more concrete sanctions now that the Special Envoy and the SoEA have expressed support, but I would like to hear the opinions of the remaining Senators before writing it.

[Goldwater]

I support this resolution.

[TNF]

Assuming Atlasia had the same scandal the USA did (the one discussing which opposition leaders would be "appropriate" for a new government) our nose is hardly clean on this matter. I'm inclined to stay out of it.

I'm with my colleague on this one.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

"Full support" I think is a phrase I would rather not use, but I support the majority of the concrete proposals outlined, with respect to diplomatic relations and whatnot.

This

[TNF]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I object to this amendment.

[Lumine]

Amendment hostile to me. Removing the "full support" line it's fine with me, but eliminating the first paragraph along with the possibility of trade sanctions destroys the purpose of the resolution. It would mean that we are "condemning Russia" while refusing to act on it beyond a few words.

[TNF]

Trade sanctions will only further push Russia into a hostile position. I do not support increasing hostilities for the sake of saving a neo-Nazi led/supported Ukrainian government.

[Lumine]

Trade sanctions will only further push Russia into a hostile position. I do not support increasing hostilities for the sake of saving a neo-Nazi led/supported Ukrainian government.

Yes, the Ukrainian government has many extremist elements, and I certainly understand the argument of giving them help in a conditional basis. However, are we supposed to just talk and let Russia (which is many ways worse, after all) get away with a blatant act of aggression just because we disagree with the political views of the Ukrainian government? I perceive this as standing up for Ukraine as a whole, not "saving" the current provisional government.

I know fictional scenarios won't help the debate but I am curious: If the current Ukrainian government was more moderate, would you still oppose those aspects of the resolution?

[TNF]

Russia is in no way worse than a government that is being led around by the nose by armed neo-Nazis. You do not get worse than open and armed Nazism. Putin is an authoritarian strongman and nothing more. He's no ideologue. The same cannot be said for the new government of Ukraine. This is not our fight. I condemn Russia's aggressive actions in the same manner that I condemn the imperative of any nation to exact force upon another to get desired political change; if the Russians engage Ukraine with military force, I support all efforts by the Ukrainian people to resist Russian aggression. I do not support aiding either side with armaments, aid, or support in the form of trade sanctions.

Yes, I would oppose these aspects even in an alternate scenario, because they are committing the Republic of Atlasia to a course of action that involves us in the internal politics of not one, but two sovereign nations with which I would not like to create bad blood or hostilities. I do not find it appropriate for the Republic to take sides in a conflict that has absolutely nothing to do with the people of the Republic of Atlasia.

[Donerail]

Yes, I would oppose these aspects even in an alternate scenario, because they are committing the Republic of Atlasia to a course of action that involves us in the internal politics of not one, but two sovereign nations with which I would not like to create bad blood or hostilities. I do not find it appropriate for the Republic to take sides in a conflict that has absolutely nothing to do with the people of the Republic of Atlasia.

It's not about aiding either side. Atlasia shouldn't be seen as taking these measures as an anti-Putin or even inherently pro-Ukrainian move. What our actions are fundamentally about, and the actions guiding the Administration, are upholding international law. The influence that Svoboda has within the Ukrainian government is disturbing, but our actions here should be seen as nothing more and nothing less than upholding international norms and preserving a nation's territorial integrity, just as we would respond to an aggressive invasion of any other sovereign nation.

The situation we have is one state, that has previously recognized the legitimacy of another sovereign state, using its armed forces to intrude into the territory of that other state against the wishes of the other state's legitimate leadership. The actions Russia has taken are simply illegal, and Atlasia must respond, as we would to any other illegal aggression, to uphold the international norms that safeguard us all.

[Southern Senator North Carolina Yankee]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile
STatus: An objection has been filed by Mr. X as well. The VP can open a vote on this once it has passed 6:50:06 pm tomorrow.

[Sopranos Republican]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sponsor Feedback: Hostile

Status: An objection has been filed by Mr. X as well. A vote is now open on the above amendment. Please vote: AYE, NAY, or Abstain.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Nay

[Lumine]

Nay.

[Goldwater]

NAY

[DC Al Fine]

Aye

[President Tyrion]

Aye, but I think we can push back to a middle ground