Revised Prediction

Way back on January 1 I listed my predictions for the next decade. The first was the following:

Prediction 1 - The last free and fair election in Ukraine will be in January if Yanukovich wins so he can fulfill his threat to end "democracy".

OK. As I stated in that post, predictions would be subject to change as the inevitable chaos theory took hold. I'm modifying the prediction in three ways:

1. This is the next to last free election since Yanukovich won the election, but the margin was insufficient to let him have free rein with his policies.

2. Yulia Tymoshenko will prove to be a bigger problem for him than anticipated because of point 1 and the fact that she is rumoured to have Putin's support. Additionally, he can't afford to dissolve the Rada and does not yet have enough MPs to form a majority.

3. In light of point 2, Moscow will have to rethink its frequently aggressive positions regarding some of its neighbors, particularly Ukraine, as Ukrainians in the west and the region around Kyiv will not take kindly to their continued interference, especially if it becomes more visible on the ground.

US Embassy - UK

I really don't have a point of view on the design of the new US embassy in South London except that it's the typical, fortress type of design despite all the glass and blast proof plastic, which is hardly welcoming. But welcoming is not what the US is all about any longer, is it? It's saving grace, I guess, is that it is not surrounded by the usual cement and steel tank traps or ladder proof walls that are the hallmark of other US facilities or set back so far that one needs a taxi to get to the first guard hut.

The other conclusion that leaps to mind is that terrorists have succeeded in making the architectural decisions for the US based on fear.

Tymoshenko Throws Down the Gauntlet

Image via Wikipedia

...on her website, her televised speech that 1) refused to recognize the legitimacy of the Yanukovych presidency, 2) a call to form a coalition to oppose Yanukovych in the Rada and 3) was an amazing show, in and of itself.

As I've said previously, if she succeeds in forming a majority coalition Yanukovych is in deep trouble. Rumour has it that Putin actually favoured Yulia while Medvedev supported Yanukovych. That split, if true, is not good news for Victor.

The money line:

I also want to state that under no circumstances will I form a coalition with Yanukovych. I won’t be signing universals and memorandums with him because I do not recognize him as the president of Ukraine and do not accept his anti-Ukrainian and anti-European policies.

Enjoy the ride.

The Falklands - Issues in International Law

The growing tension in the South Atlantic over the Falkland (Malvinas) Islands between the UK and Argentina are unlikely to lead to a second Falklands war for many reasons, not the least of which is that Argentina could not successfully deploy its now depleted forces to the islands without significant bloodshed. Stationed on and around the Falklands are about 1,000 British troops, four fighter/bomber aircraft, a frigate and a local population that is unlikely to be surprised a second time. For all practical purposes a military confrontation is not going to happen. Argentina is indulging in diplomatic tactics coupled with questionable international legal claims that will not change the status of the islands nor stop the current oil drilling. If oil is discovered in the volumes suspected, it would not be surprising to discover revenue sharing as part of the settlement.

From a legal standpoint, Argentina is also on thin ice.

The Guardian reports that the Argentine government has issued a decree which will require all ships bound for the islands or travelling through waters claimed (emphasis mine) by Argentina to secure a permit. The clear purpose is to prevent ships carrying oil exploration equipment from Argentina to the Islands. The Telegraph reports as well that the Argentine authorities have already prevented a ship, the Thor Leader, from leaving port carrying pipeline equipment which it was suspected was destined for the Islands. A claim of territorial waters is not equivalent to a legal right. The dispute raises a number of international law issues.

Under international law, Argentina can limit access by ships to and from its ports provided it has not entered into any treaty obligations which would require it to allow unconditional access to its ports. To my knowledge, there is no provision for unconditional access. However, Argentina has extended its rights to ships passing through its territorial waters of Argentina. Regardless of the extent of territorial waters, Article 17 of the Law of the Sea Convention provides that ships have a right of innocent passage, as defined, thereby making the enforcement of the Argentinian act legally problematic, even if one accepted its territorial water claims.

Argentina has not been successful in establishing its claim to the Falklands in law or in fact. The last attempt in the latter choice ended in military disaster and collapse of the government. It is in the process of drumming up support in South and Central America for its claims, but this is really only smoke and mirrors and costs the supporting countries nothing. However, from a political standpoint, the political position of sovereignty is double edged. Venezuela, for example, in an attempt to be relevant or simply annoying, recognized the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia - both legally recognized as part of Georgia. The same argument could theoretically be applied to the Falkland Islands - not a trend, I suspect, that Argentina or its supporters would like to see continued. Therefore, from a practical standpoint, this position is not only weak but very dangerous. Furthermore, the UN Charter contains broad language supporting the right of self-determination which makes the legal claim over the islands - virtually totally populated by British subjects - unsupportable.

Argentina announced that it will take the dispute that has arisen because of oil to the UN. Assuming that Argentina will not raise the issue of sovereignty and only addresses the sea bed issue, it would still be necessary for their representative to set forth the legal reasons why Argentina's jurisdiction applies under the appropriate provisions of the Law of the Sea Convention.

The Law of the Sea Convention applies only to the sea bed outside of territorial limits. Therefore, the position of both the UK and Argentina claiming 200 nautical miles would need to be decided first. The Convention sets forth a detailed definition of continental shelves which may extend the area subject to national control. This limit is, at a maximum, 200 nautical miles from the baseline of the territorial sea. The baseline is further defined to include consideration of the extent of the continental shelf and can be up to 350 nautical miles. It is unlikely that either claim of more than 200 nautical miles, which would otherwise be subject to additional rules should they overlap, is legally supportable. However, Argentina claims sovereignty over the islands on, at least, the extension of its continental shelf as well as the 350 nautical mile limit.

Any dispute under the Convention must be brought to the Commission on the Limits to the Continental Shelf, which, in fact, Argentina has done. That case has not been decided in favour of Argentina as an answer to its claims were filed by the UK in August 2009. Further, a position claiming 350 nautical miles would necessarily bring up the issue of sovereignty of the islands - something that won't be touched by the ICJ or the Commission.

In any case, Argentina, if it chooses to push the matter forward to conclusion, will ultimately need to litigate this matter in the ICJ - a very long process.

Legally, its position regarding the issue of drilling in what Argentina claims as territorial waters will not be easily resolved. Which is why a diplomatic and economic solution will likely be the route both nations will follow.

Iranian Sensitivities

Image via Wikipedia

Iran finally noticed that Saudi Arabia, Qatar, Emirates etc., refer to that body of water dividing them from Iran as the Arabian Gulf. Now they are retaliating.

The BBC reports that the Iranian Transport Minister, Hamid Behbahani, has given foreign airlines 15 days to change the name to Persian Gulf on their in flight monitors.

BBC also reports the the good minister is under threat of impeachment for incompetence. Timing is everything.

Tymoshenko Re-groups

Image via Wikipedia

So there is no deal. Yulia Tymoshenko is not resigning and is going to fight in the Rada. The maneuvering has already begun.

Victor Yanukovych has said that by the end of the week he will form a new parliamentary majority. This would allow him to dismiss the PM and anoint her successor. If he cannot form a majority then he is in trouble. Meanwhile, ByUT - Yulia's party - has called for an early session of the Rada on the 24th. Can Victor put together his majority by March 2 - the last day for forming a government - if Yulia starts organizing first? That will be hard, particularly if Yulia can bring together 226 members of the 450 person Rada under her wing - which would prevent a vote of no-confidence and her dismissal. If she cannot then ByUT will go into opposition. Neither alternative is going to be helpful to the new president. And he is showing signs of intense worry.

We are holding coalition talks with absolutely all parliamentary groups...

Yanukovych said this yesterday in an interview on channel 1+1.


On March 2 either Yulia will be dismissed or Yanukovich is going to have to consider a coalition with ByUT, a very, very unpalatable option for him. Or - he can order a snap parliamentary election.

Tymoshenko is going to be repairing all her burnt bridges to hold together her coalition and the government - where the real power rests. Holding on to that will mean control of the budget, economic policies, the corporate sector and even most of the security forces.

It's easy to see, therefore, why Yanukovych is pressing hard because if he loses this battle a PM, who despises him and his party and who never, ever forgets, will doom his presidency. Stay tuned.

Election Notes

Ukraine - Yulia Tymoschenko has withdrawn her law suit challenging the election of the incoming Victor; Yulia is not resigning as PM; Yulia is really, really angry and will boycott the inauguration. The next question is what will Victor do with an angry and powerful PM. I suspect that Tymoschenko withdrew the court action for two reasons: she'd lose (but the ensuing instability would be unacceptable to the new president) and (therefore) a deal has been cut. What was the deal? As an aside - Russia has not decided yet if they will send someone to attend the inauguration ceremony. Considering their man won, the reticence is odd.

Egypt - I readily admit to a lack of knowledge about Egyptian politics following the Ptolemy era and my recent experience with modern Egypt was decidedly unpleasant. However, the beginnings of a campaign to get Mohammed ElBaradei to run for president of Egypt are strange. Egypt is not noted for its democratic system but regardless of the seemingly insurmountable barrier of a Mubarak dynasty, what is behind the decision to run? Does he have a base of support? Does his experience as head of the IAEA give him some experience for running Egypt? I simply don't know and if anyone does, let me know.

CPAC - OK. I know - no US politics. Get over it. Congratulations to Ron Paul for his enormous and meaningless victory over Sarah and Mitt. Run with it Paul. According to the Very Serious Pundits in Washington (that's you Mr. Broder) this is good news for McCain.

and, last but not least...

Niger - Anyone remember yellow cake? No? There is a lot of it in Niger. In a Niger version of elections, the army took over the reins of power on Thursday from the 71 year old president Mamadou Tandja who is now supposedly in Chad. Tandja was allegedly planning to extend, again, his rule without resort to a messy vote. In what may be one of the best understatements of the year so far, a French diplomat said "All I can say is that it would appear that Tandja is not in a good position". Salou Djibo, a squadron chief, has assumed the leadership role.