I don’t agree with that interpretation of sovereignity, those states exist for 30 years and are recognized by most other countries and btw i don’t think there is need for a country to even be internationally recognized, especially by some agreement in order to be a country.
Not to mention there is no questioning of it anyway. Even Russia is not challenging Ukraine sovereignity as a whole. Also Crimea is not Ukrainian since 2014 not because Khrushchev decision was illegitimate but because people of Crimea decided they don’t want to be in Ukraine.
This was huge L for a diplomat, especially Chinese considered their international politics and hugely successful diplomacy recently.
What he should mean and tell is those countries aren’t and never were sovereign because they are just USA puppets.
That said, cope and seethe, Stupidity Belt, your shitty nazi holes shouldn’t exist in the first place.
This clip is only about Crimea, and in that context the meaning is different, as it’s about whether it is Russian or Ukrainian, since it is contested. no one did any attacks on baltic chihuauas. And yet again, international law have nothing to do with it, west can play the charade about “not recognizing the annexation fo Crimea” but ultimately it did happened and they can either admit it, ceas all relations with Russia or pretend Crimea don’t exist and forbid anyone from their countries to even look at it.
Then again, western diplomacy is worth shit considering for example US duplicity against One China policy or EU lying in case of Minsk agreement. China finally moved to the only language they really listen to: power.
Isn’t that interview the origin of the Politico article, though? I haven’t seen the full interview, but unless he was more explicit in some other part of the interview, Politico just seems to have taken that clip and removed the context
I don’t agree with that interpretation of sovereignity, those states exist for 30 years and are recognized by most other countries and btw i don’t think there is need for a country to even be internationally recognized, especially by some agreement in order to be a country. Not to mention there is no questioning of it anyway. Even Russia is not challenging Ukraine sovereignity as a whole. Also Crimea is not Ukrainian since 2014 not because Khrushchev decision was illegitimate but because people of Crimea decided they don’t want to be in Ukraine.
This was huge L for a diplomat, especially Chinese considered their international politics and hugely successful diplomacy recently.
What he should mean and tell is those countries aren’t and never were sovereign because they are just USA puppets.
That said, cope and seethe, Stupidity Belt, your shitty nazi holes shouldn’t exist in the first place.
maybe this is what he meant, assuming the translation is correct
He was speaking in French, which is pretty easy to translate to english so i doubt it can be this much different.
The original is “status quo,” but it translates to sovereignty
based on this clip from the interview, Western media is definitely “missing” (deliberately) the point here
This clip is only about Crimea, and in that context the meaning is different, as it’s about whether it is Russian or Ukrainian, since it is contested. no one did any attacks on baltic chihuauas. And yet again, international law have nothing to do with it, west can play the charade about “not recognizing the annexation fo Crimea” but ultimately it did happened and they can either admit it, ceas all relations with Russia or pretend Crimea don’t exist and forbid anyone from their countries to even look at it.
Then again, western diplomacy is worth shit considering for example US duplicity against One China policy or EU lying in case of Minsk agreement. China finally moved to the only language they really listen to: power.
Isn’t that interview the origin of the Politico article, though? I haven’t seen the full interview, but unless he was more explicit in some other part of the interview, Politico just seems to have taken that clip and removed the context
Idk, it’s clearly cut.
right, but the clip linked in the article is basically the same thing, they just removed a few dozen seconds