Ukraine and Russia were at a standoff over the Kerch Strait, a waterway that links the Azov Sea with the Black Sea. According to CNN, "In a statement, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense said [small gunboats] and a tugboat were attacked." Russia says that Ukraine provoked the attack by entering Russia's "territorial waters" and "carrying out dangerous maneuvers". Ukraine says that Russian border patrol vessels "carried out openly aggressive action" against their ships. The two countries are at a disagreement, each saying that the other side started the conflict. NATO is calling for "restraint and de-escalation". A 2003 treaty says that the Azov Sea and the Kerch Strait are domestic waters of Russia AND Ukraine. They have been in conflict since 2014 because of other territorial situations.
Clike HERE for more information.
Would the attack be such a big problem if there hadn't been previous conflicts between Ukraine and Russia?
I think that this most recent attack fueled the fire and added to the tension between Ukraine and Russia. I think that both countries will be keeping a close eye out for each other.
Do you think that the 2003 treaty should be considered violated because of the attack?
I think that the treaty could be considered violated since the water belongs to both Ukraine and Russia and the standoff turned into an attack on the water.
Replies
Well done Brecken!
I think that it would be a biiger problem if the two countries had not conflicted before. It doesn't make it anymore right, but we have grow used to this happening between Ukraine and Russia. I think that the treaty was definetly violated considering there was open conflict.
I think that if there hadn't been conflicts before this majot one, it wouldn't have been such a big deal to either parties and tick them off as much as it did. I think that it should be considered violated.
I agree that conflicts before this one made the most recent attack a bigger deal. I think that both sides are heated and being very cautious. One wrong move from either side might escalate the problem even more.
All countries are scared and looking out for eachother because with technology these days you can do almost anything. I also think think the attacks still would be a big problem because of allies. If the water belonged to both of them and they both call it their own their will be a war about it if they can't figure things out.
I agree when you say that war is a possibility. The treaty says that the domestic waters belong to both Ukraine and Russia. I wonder if there will be further conflict because of this part of the water.
I think it still would have been a huge problem because no country is going to take an attack lightly. I'm sure the previous conflicts had to do something with the level of intensity. Yes this definitely violated the treaty because they both own the water.
I like how you said that the level of intensity was greater because of previous conflicts. I think that the attack was more likely to happen because of this. As for the treaty, I think that it could be considered violated. I also think that it could not be seen that way. I think that it depends on what the specifics of the treaty are.
It would have probably been a bigger problem considering the treaty and the obvious lack of conflict. Yes, considering that both countries have control of those specific areas of water.
I think any attack is a big problem and every country takes it serious. I think especially if there has been no conflicts that it would be such a big problem since you have a country that is attacking you. I think it should be considered because it had to do with water and property.
-
1
-
2
of 2 Next