The geek with a cynical view

Tuesday, March 4, 2014

1 I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised onFebruary 25, 2014, by the House Leader of the Official Opposition(Mr. Cullen) regarding statements made in the House by the Member

Full text of House Speaker Andrew Scheer's ruling on Brad Butt

1I am now prepared to rule on the question of privilege raised onFebruary 25, 2014, by the House Leader of the Official Opposition(Mr. Cullen) regarding statements made in the House by the Member fromMississauga
—
Streetsville (Mr. Butt).I would like to thank the hon. House Leader of the Official Oppositionfor having raised this matter, as well as the hon. Leader of the Governmentin the House (Mr. Van Loan) and the honourable Members for WinnipegNorth (Mr. Lamoureux) and Kingston andthe Islands (Mr. Hsu) for theircomments. I also want to acknowledge the statements made by theMember for Mississauga
—
Streetsville.In raising this matter, the hon. House Leader of the OfficialOpposition claimed that the hon. Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville haddeliberately misled the House on February 6, 2014, during debate on BillC-23,
Fair Elections Act
, when he stated that he had witnessed evidence ofvoter fraud first-hand. He further argued that the matter was not resolvedby the statements made by the Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville onFebruary 24 and 25 where he admitted that, contrary to his original claim,he had not actually witnessed what he had originally
claimed
to havewitnessed. In his view, this was not a simple case of someonemisspeaking; he argued rather that it was a case where the Memberdeliberately chose to take something he knew
not
to be true and present itas eyewitness evidence; something so egregious, it constituted contempt.The hon. Leader of the Government in the House noted that theMember for Mississauga
—
Streetsville had fulfilled his obligation to correctthe record so that no inaccuracies persisted. He suggested that in and ofitself this should be sufficient to
(quote) “
rebut any concern that there hasbeen a contempt
”
(unquote).This incident highlights the primordial importance of accuracy andtruthfulness in our deliberations. All Members bear a responsibility,individually and collectively, to select the words they use very carefully andto be ever mindful of the serious consequences that can result when thisresponsibility is forgotten.

2
In calling on the Chair to arrive at a finding of
prima facie
in this case,the hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition cited my ruling ofMay 7, 2012, where at page 7650 of the
Debates
, I reminded the Housethat, before finding that a Member had deliberately misled the House, threeconditions had to be met:
(quote) “…
one, it must be proven that the statement was misleading;two, it must be established that the member making the statementknew at the time that the statement was incorrect; and three, that inmaking the statement, the member intended to mislead the House
.”
(unquote) Arguing all three of these conditions had been met, he concluded thata breach of privilege had occurred.It was with these criteria in mind that I undertook a thorough review ofall relevant statements made in the House on this matter, focussingparticularly, of course, on the statements made by the hon. Member forMississauga
—
Streetsville:Originally, on February 6, he stated, (quote)
“
I have actuallywitnessed other people picking up the voter cards, going to the campaignoffice of whatever candidate they support and handing out these votercards to other individuals, who then walk into voting stations with friendswho vouch for them with no ID
.
”
(unquote) Later that day, he added:(quote)
“
I will relate
(…)
something
I have

actually

seen
”.
(unquote)It was only on February 24, that he rose to state, (quote)
“
onFebruary 6
(…)
I made a statement
(…)
that is not accurate. I just want toreflect the fact that I have not personally witnessed
(…)
[fraudulent activity]
(…)
and want the record to properly show that
”.
(unquote)On February 25, he returned to the House, characterized hisFebruary 6 statement as (quote)
“
an error on my part
”
(unquote) andapologized (quote)
“
to all Canadians and to all members of the House
”
(unquote), adding that (quote)
“
It was never my intention, in any way, tomislead the House
”

(unquote). The Chair takes due note that the Memberfor Mississauga
—
Streetsville has admitted that his February 6 statementwas not true and that he has apologized for his mistake.

3
As was noted by the hon. Leader of the Government in the House,we all recognize that there is an enduring practice here of giving Membersthe benefit of the doubt when the accuracy of their statements ischallenged. It is often the case that questions of privilege raised on suchmatters are found to be disputes as to facts rather than
prima facie
questions of privilege, primarily due to the high threshold of evidence thatthe House expects. Speaker Parent stated on page 9247 of
Debates
onOctober 19, 2000:
(quote)
“
Only on the strongest and clearest evidence can the Houseor the Speaker take steps to deal with cases of attempts to mislead
members.” (unquote)

From what the Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville and otherMembers have revealed, it is quite clear that the House has been providedwith two narratives that are contradictory statements. At the same time, theMember for Mississauga
—
Streetsville stated that he had no intention ofmisleading the House.Speaker Milliken was faced with a similar set of circumstances inFebruary 2002 when the then Minister of National Defence, Art Eggleton,provided contradictory information to the House. In ruling on a question ofprivilege raised about the contradiction, Speaker Milliken stated onFebruary 1, at page 8581 of Debates:
(quote) “
I am prepared, as I must be, to accept the minister’s
assertion that he had no intention to mislead the House.
” (unquote)
In keeping with that precedent, I am prepared to accord the samecourtesy to the Member for Mississauga
—
Streetsville. At the same time, the fact remains that the House continues to beseized of completely contradictory statements. This is a difficult position inwhich to leave Members who must be able to depend on the integrity of theinformation with which they are provided to perform their parliamentaryduties. Accordingly, in keeping with the precedent cited earlier in which
Speaker Milliken indicated that the matter merited (quote) “
further

consideration by an appropriate committee, if only to clear the air

”

(unquote), I am prepared in this case for the same reason to allow thematter to be put to the House.I therefore invite the hon. House Leader of the Official Opposition tomove the traditional motion at this time

Monday, March 3, 2014

2014 Russian military intervention in Ukraine

The Russian military intervention in Ukraine began in the aftermath of the 2014 Ukrainian revolution, when, on 27–28 February 2014, Russian troops seized control of most of the Crimean peninsula of Ukraine located on the northern coast of the Black Sea, including civil buildings, airports, and military bases.[11] On 1 March 2014, the Russian legislature approved the use of the Russian military in Ukraine, and Russian officials stated that their military forces in Crimea were not a breach of existing agreements between Russia and Ukraine.[12] The Ukrainian response has been muted trying to find a diplomatic solution, with no military action on the part of Ukraine's government, which was formed in Kiev less than a week before the intervention. Russia vowed troops would stay until the political situation has been "normalized", i.e. until the March 30 referendum.[13]

1 Background
2 Causes
3 Russian military movements
3.1 Occupation of Crimea
3.2 Ukrainian mainland
4 Non-military events in other regions of Ukraine
5 Crimean refugees
6 Reactions
6.1 Crimean response
6.2 Ukrainian response
6.3 Russian response
6.3.1 Russian dissent
6.4 International reactions
6.4.1 International organizations
7 See also
8 Notes
9 References
10 External links

Background
Main article: 2014 Crimean crisis
See also: Euromaidan and 2014 Ukrainian revolution

Political crisis and disturbances in Ukraine culminated in the ousting of the democratically elected President Viktor Yanukovich who fled from Kiev, the Ukrainian capital, on 22 February 2014 as protesters overthrew his administration and the opposition took control of the capital city and national government. [14] Shortly thereafter, the Ukrainian Parliament Verkhovna Rada voted to restore the 2004 version of the Constitution of Ukraine and impeach the former president, Yanukovich. While on the run, Yanukovich declared his unwillingness to resign and some politicians from Ukraine's east and south regions, including Crimea, declared continuing loyalty to Yanukovych.[15]

On 24 February, Russia recalled its ambassador to Ukraine for consultations.[16] On 26 February, President Vladimir Putin ordered an urgent drill to test the combat readiness of his armed forces across western Russia.[17]

On 27 February, a pro-Russian politician, Sergey Aksyonov, was hastily voted in as Crimea's prime minister when armed men in military uniforms that looked Russian but were not "having a fixed distinctive sign recognizable at a distance" as such, as the Geneva convention requires,[18] seized government buildings in Simferopol, the capital city of the Autonomous Republic of Crimea and ousted the prime minister appointed by the President of Ukraine. Aksyonov declared himself in charge of local military and law enforcement. On 1 March, the acting president of Ukraine, Oleksandr Turchynov, decreed the Crimean legislature's appointment of Sergei Aksyonov as unconstitutional. The Crimean legislature has declared its intention to hold a referendum on greater autonomy from Kiev on 25 May 2014.[19]

Councilors in the Crimean city of Sevastopol, home to the Russian and Ukrainian Black Sea naval fleets, selected a Russian citizen as mayor, as pro-Russian demonstrators chanted "a Russian mayor for a Russian city". Furthermore, Sevastopol's police chief said he would refuse orders from Kiev.[20] In Sevastopol, Kerch, and other Crimean cities, pro-Russian demonstrators pulled down the flag of Ukraine and replaced it with the flag of Russia.[21][22]

The occupation into Crimea started immediately after the press conference of former President Viktor Yanukovych, held on 28 February 2014 in Rostov-on-Don, near the eastern border of Ukraine, where he called for Putin to "restore order" in Ukraine. Sergey Aksyonov also appealed to Russian President Vladimir Putin to provide assistance in ensuring the peace in the Autonomous Republic of Crimea. Putin swiftly responded and both houses of the Russian legislature (State Duma) voted on 1 March 2014 to send Russian troops into Crimea. [23][24]
Causes

The Port of Sevastopol and the town of Kacha are located in Sevastopol, a city to the west of Crimea but part of Ukraine. Both locations hold key strategic value for Russia, economically and militarily. The Port of Sevastopol is considered a key hold for maritime routes between the Black Sea and the Sea of Marmara, and, therefore, the Mediterranean Sea and the Atlantic Ocean. The port is also one of the few warm deepwater ports available to Russia in the Black Sea, which it currently leases from Ukraine. As the Ukranian revolution unfolded and Kiev, its capital, began to distance itself from Russia, access to the port by Russia was jeopardized. Ensuring access to the port is considered one of the main factors that sparked Russia's military intervention. On the other hand, the town of Kacha serves as military headquarters for the 25th Independent Anti-submarine Helicopter Regiment (25th AHR) and the 917th Independent Composite Air Regiment (917th ICAR) of the Black Sea Fleet Naval Air Force (which belongs to Russia).

At the same time, the Autonomous Republic of Crimea occupies most of the Crimean peninsula. The republic is and operates as an autonomous republic with its own constitution even though it belongs to the Ukraine. Many Russian civilians and service members reside and operate in it. As tensions escalated in the region, Russia intervened under the justification that it must "protect Russian civilians and military in Ukraine".[a]
Russian military movement
Occupation of Crimea

On 26 February 2014, Russian-speaking gunmen in unmarked military uniform, said to be Russian soldiers[26], established a checkpoint between the major Crimean cities of Sevastopol and Simferopol.[27][28] On 27 February, gunmen in military uniform seized the Crimean parliamentary building and the Council of Ministers building and replaced the Ukrainian flag with the Russian flag.[1]

On 28 February, gunmen accused by the Ukrainian government of being Russian soldiers occupied Simferopol International Airport and Sevastopol International Airport, while Western and independent media reported Russian troop movements in Crimea, including Russian military helicopters moving into the peninsula and Russian Army trucks approaching Simferopol, the Crimean capital.[29][30] Ukrainian officials said Russian forces took over a military airbase in Sevastopol, landed troops at another airbase,[31] and surrounded a coast guard base.[32]

On 1 March, Ukrainian military bases in Crimea were "surrounded and sealed off" by Russian military forces as they seized control of the peninsula.[33] Arseniy Yatsenyuk, the Prime Minister of Ukraine had earlier asked his Turkish counterpart Recep Tayyip Erdogan not to let the frigate through the Bosporus strait, according to the Kiev Times.[34] Sixteen soldiers infiltrated the radio-technical company at the Maganome Cape near Feodosiya.[35][36][not in citation given] There was information that the 55th Anti-Air Defense in Yevpatoriya was seized.[35]

On 2 March, a Ukrainian marine infantry detachment stationed around Feodosiya was surrounded by armed men demanding surrender by 9:00AM EET.[citation needed]

On 2 March, the Russian military, without identification, blocked the 36th Ukrainian Coastal Defense unit (Ukrainian Navy) in Perevalne (between Simferopol and Alushta) and demanded that the besieged Ukrainian Marines lay down their arms.[37] The 400 soldiers of the Russian special operations were brought by the ship of the Russian Black Sea Fleet BDK "Azov".[38]

On 2 March, 14 Russian Special Operation soldiers attempted to disarm the 191st Training unit of Ukrainian Navy in Sevastopol.[39][40]

On the same day, there also was an attempt to take over the 39th Training unit of Ukrainian Navy (Sevastopol) by another 30 soldiers of the Russian Federation.[41][42] The State Border Guard Service of Ukraine acknowledged seizure of its headquarters of the Azov-Black Sea regional administration and the Simferopol border detachment by the armed Russian soldiers.[43][44] Later that day there appeared information that the Border Guard headquarters are not overtaken.[45]

On March 2, 2014 at around 18:00 (LST) people of the Crimea Front took over the building of Trade Unions in Simferopol and under the flag of Russia announced that they protect the Constitution of Ukraine.[46]

On March 2, 2014 Russian soldiers blocked the Ukrainian military installation А-0669 in Kerch.[47]

On March 2, 2014 the claimed commander of the Ukrainian Navy Rear Admiral Denis Berezovsky officially announced that he pledged his allegiance "to the people of Crimea".[48] On March 2, in interview to Hromadske.TV at around 19:30 MP Yuri Syrotyuk communicated that Berezovsky had been dismissed already at 12:00 (LST), before his defection.[49] The decision was taken in response to Berezovsky's order to lay down arms and not resist the Russian forces in case of blockade or isolation.[49] Some Ukrainian units refused and informed the acting Minister of DefenseIhor Tenyukh, who replaced Berezovsky with Rear Admiral Serhiy Hayduk.[49] Actions of Berezovsky are being checked by the General Prosecutor office.[50]

On March 2, 2014, the Internal Troops of Ukraine in Simferopol refused to lay down their arms and side with the Russians.[51]

On March 3, 2014 near 02:00 (LST), Russian troops captured the Ukrainian Border Guard base in Balaklava after repeated assaults.[10]

On March 1–2, 2014 ships of the Russian Northern Fleet and the Russian Baltic Fleet were arriving.[52]

There was a number of incidents where the local civilians requested the Russian soldiers do not provoke the Ukrainian military.[53]

On March 3, 2014, Russia vowed troops would stay until the political situation has been "normalised".[13]

On March 3, 2014 reports surfaced that the commander of Russian Black Sea Fleet Vice-Admiral Aleksandr Vitko issued an official ultimatum to all Ukrainian military servicemen to surrender by 05:00 (LST) March 4, 2014 or face a military confrontation.[54][55] These reports were later denied by the Russian foreign ministry in a statement through the Vedomosti news agency[56] and confirmed by the representative of the Black Sea Fleet headquarters.[57]

Around 21:00 (LST) on March 3, 2014, five vehicles with soldiers of the Russian Black Sea Fleet broke through the border checkpoint "Krym-Kuban" at the ferry crossing "Krym-Kavkaz" in Kerch.[58][59][60]
Ukrainian mainland[edit]

On March 2, 2014, the head of Chernihiv regional council announced that the Russians were conducting military movements on the Chernihiv Oblast segment of the State Border of Ukraine.[61]

According to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, on March 3, 2014 the Russian Federation started to stockpile military forces on several segments of the eastern borders with Ukraine (Kharkiv, Luhansk, and Donetsk oblasts).[62] Later, the Luhansk Border detachment dismissed those claims as a disinformation by media.[63]
Non-military events in other regions of Ukraine[edit](For non-military events in the Crimea, and also for military events there, see 2014 Crimean crisis.)

On 1 March, the Oblast council of Luhansk Oblast voted to demand giving Russian language the status of second official language, stopping ″persecution of Berkut fighters″, disarming Maidan self-defense units and banning a number of far-right political organizations like Svoboda and UNA-UNSO. For the case the authorities failed to comply with the demands, the Oblast council reserved itself the ″right to ask for help from the brotherly people of the Russian Federation.″[64]

On 3 March, around 200 demonstrators with Russian flags stormed the Odessa Oblast administrative building [65]

The council of the Donetsk Oblast voted to have a referendum to decide the future of the oblast.[66] On 3 March, a number of armed people started storming Donetsk Oblast administrative building, waving Russian flags and shouting ″Russia!″ and ″Berkut are heroes!″. The police did not offer resistance. [67] There are reports, that power in Donetsk has been taken over by separatists[68].
Crimean refugees

About 20 families were forced out of Crimea to find shelter in Lviv.[69] Around 100 Crimea Tatars are anticipated to arrive to Lviv this week,[69] Upwards of 675,000 Ukrainians have hightailed it out of the southeastern part of Ukraine between January and February. Also, 143,000 requests for asylum had been sent to Russia within a two-week period as of beginning of March.[70]
Reactions
Crimean response

Crimean Prime Minister Aksyonov (whose party obtained just 4% of the vote and got just 3 seats in the most recent election of the Crimean parliament)[71] asserted control over all security forces in Crimea with the help of armed men[71] and appealed to Putin for assistance in maintaining "peace and tranquility". He said officers who disagreed with his decision should resign.[72] The position of Prime Minister is normally appointed by the President of Ukraine;[73] On 1 March, the acting president of Ukraine, Oleksandr Turchynov decreed the appointment of Sergei Aksyonov as the head of the government of Crimea as unconstitutional.[74]

The chairman of the Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People, Refat Chubarov, expressed concern that Tatars in Crimea would be threatened as a result of the Russian takeover. He said Crimea is part of Ukraine and warned of a collapse in "world order" if Russia succeeds in separating Crimea from Ukraine.[75]
Ukrainian response[edit]

Interim Ukrainian President Oleksandr Turchynov accused Russia of "provoking a conflict" by invading Crimea. He compared Russia's military actions to the 2008 Russia–Georgia war, when Russian troops occupied parts of the Republic of Georgia, and the breakaway enclaves of Abkhaziaand South Ossetia were established under the control of Russian-backed administrations. He called on Putin to withdraw Russian troops from Crimea and stated that Ukraine will "preserve its territory" and "defend its independence".[76] On 1 March, he warned, "Military intervention would be the beginning of war and the end of any relations between Ukraine and Russia."[77]

On 1 March, Acting President Oleksandr Turchynov placed the Armed Forces of Ukraine on full alert and combat readiness. [78]

As Russia stated that its occupation of Crimea was aimed at protecting Russians abroad, Ukrainian Radio and U.S. officials compared the current crisis in Crimea with the Sudeten Crisis of 1938 in Czechoslovakia, which preceded the start of World War II,[79][80] [81] a comparison also made by former Czech Minister for Foreign Affairs Karel Schwarzenberg, who noted that Hitler took the Sudetenland from Czechoslovakia on the pretext of "protecting its German population".[82]
"Today Vladimir Putin in Europe is Adolf Hitler" (Savik Shuster [81])

Leonid Kravchuk, the first president of Ukraine, condemned Russian intervention and occupation of Crimea by Russian forces.[83] He said that even though he is 80, he will take a weapon and defend his land.[84]

Yulia Tymoshenko assures that the reason for the Russian aggression is due to the Ukrainian intent for European integration.[85] In her opinion, Russia seeks full capitulation of Ukraine.[86]

National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine issued a notice where it informs that the Russian Federation completely violates conditions of the Russian Black Sea Fleet base on the territory of Ukraine.[87]

The United Diaspora of Azerbaijani in Ukraine (that accounts for some 40,000 people just in Crimea) supports the territorial integrity of of Ukraine and considers inadmissible actions of the Russian Federation for introduction of troops in Crimea.[88]
Russian response

Before the military intervention, Russia recalled its ambassador to Ukraine for consultations.[16] Russian President Vladimir Putin reportedly told his US counterpart, Barack Obama, that Russia was acting to protect ethnic Russians and Russian-speakers in Crimea and eastern Ukraine.[89]

The deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs Grigory Karasin accused the new Cabinet of Ukraine of chauvinism.[90]

Aleksei Pushkov (other languages), the Chairman of the Russian State Duma committee on Foreign Affairs, said that if the will of the people should decide who should rule in Kiev and should lead to self-determination for Kosovo, then it would be wrong to deny the same rights to the majority of people in Crimea. He added that he thought the Crimean Parliament's planned March 30th[91] referendum (on greater Crimean autonomy, according to the BBC's Russian-language service)[92] was a much more legitimate way to change the status quo than the demonstrations on Kiev's Maidan Square.[92]

The provisional working group for monitoring of human rights observance on the territory of Ukraine, spokepersons Maksim Shevchenko and Andrei Yurov, confirmed that Russian soldiers are openly standing on the perimeter of the Ukrainian hamlet Perevalne.[93] That fact is mentioned on the website of the council at the President of Russia on development of civil society and human rights.[94][full citation needed]
Russian dissen

In Moscow, a meeting took place next to the building of the Ministry of Defense in protest against the Russian intervention in Ukraine. 28 protesters were arrested by the police.[95]

Andrei Yurov, an expert of the Moscow Helsinki Group, said that the decision of the Council of the Federation, which allows Russian President Vladimir Putin to use Russian military forces on the territory of Ukraine, has been taken on the basis of unconfirmed information about the "victims" among citizens in Crimea.[96]
International reactions

United States – On March 1, President Obama held a phone conversation with Putin and said that the Russian invasion was a "violation of Ukrainian sovereignty and territorial integrity... [and a] breach of international law." He warned of "greater political and economic isolation" and threatened to withdraw the United States from the 40th G8 summit chaired by Russia. US Secretary of State John Kerry also warned Russia of sanctions against them if they did not pull out.[97]

China – On 1 March, Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang urged all sides involved in the Ukraine situation to comply with international law and seek a political solution to their disputes through dialogue and negotiations.[98]

Canada – On 1 March, Canada recalled its ambassador from Russia.[99]

Sweden – On 1 March, Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt made several statements condemning the ongoing Russian military occupation of Crimea.[100] He said that it is obvious that an occupation of Crimea by Russia is taking place.[101]

Australia – On 2 March, the Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said that Russia's actions in Ukraine were "not the kind... of a friend and neighbour and I think Russia should back off".[102]

New Zealand – On 2 March, New Zealand's Foreign Affairs Minister Murray McCully said the situation was "deeply worrying".[103]

Germany – On 2 March, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier urged Russia to explain its intentions regarding its troops in Crimea.[104]

Ireland – On 2 March, Irish Tánaiste and Minister for Foreign Affairs Eamon Gilmore called on Russia to abide by international law and to respect Ukraine’s territorial integrity and independence. He described the situation as "dangerous" and called on all sides to "avoid any provocation"[105] - an expression that echoed language used by both Russia Today and the European Parliament in relation to Kiev’s abolition of the regional status of minority languages, including Russian,[106][107] as well as a recent attack on the headquarters of the Communist Party of Ukraine.[107]

Japan – On the same day, Fumio Kishida, the Foreign Minister of Japan said his country is concerned about the situation and urged all parties to exercise restraint.[108]

United Kingdom – On 1 March, British Foreign Minister William Hague removed Britain from preparations for the upcoming G8 summit due to Russia's intervention in Crimea. On 1 March, Mr Hague said the UK would work with international partners to "ensure that reforms by Ukraine are matched by international willingness to provide economic support".[109]

France - French Prime Minister Warned Russia That The European Union will consider "targeted measures" against Russia if tensions do not start easing in Ukraine's Crimea region.
International organizations[edit]

United Nations – The UN Security Council held a special meeting[when?] on the crisis.[110][full citation needed]

NATO – The North Atlantic Council condemned the Russian Federation’s military escalation in Crimea and expresses its grave concern regarding the authorization by the Russian Parliament to use the armed forces of the Russian Federation on the territory of Ukraine.[111]
The G7 countries have condemned what they call a violation of Ukraine's sovereignty, and have urged Russia to withdraw.[97][112]
G8 – The 40th G8 summit in Sochi, Russian Federation is now under threat as all G7 leaders are refusing to participate in it due to assumed violation of the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Ukraine, in contravention of Russia’s obligations under the UN Charter and its 1997 basing agreement with Ukraine.[113]
See also