Moscow’s Nonstop Annexation

Invade… Capture… Annex… Repeat…. Where and when will Russia stop?

Transnistria (1992)
Abkhazia (1992)
South Ossetia (2008)
Crimea (2014)
Luhansk People’s Republic (2014)
Donetsk People’s Republic (2014)
Ukraine (2022?)

Russia has a violent history of annexing the territory of nearby over the border states in the post-Soviet era. The current war in Ukraine is Moscow’s latest attempt to dissect the country. President Vladimir Putin first ordered troops into the Crimean Peninsula eight years ago in February. On March 16, 2014, with armed men guarding the polls to ensure pro-Moscow results, Russia “won” a referendum in which Crimea voted to secede from Ukraine. Actual voter turnout was estimated at 30% with only about half of that number voting to secede. In a public ceremony four days later, Putin signed a treaty incorporating Crimea into the Russian Federation. Donbas and the Crimean Peninsula are recognized internationally as part of Ukraine. According to a White House official this week, Putin is using the same “playbook” as in past military incursions. John Kirby, the National Security Council’s coordinator for strategic communications, said in a White House briefing that “The Russian government is reviewing detailed plans to purportedly annex a number of regions in Ukraine, including Kherson, Zaporizhia, all of Donetsk, and Luhansk oblasts.”

Ukraine recaptured Snake Island from Russia earlier in July but, in the eastern part of the country the military continues to lose territory to Putin’s armed forces. Luhansk is now under total Russian control. Kirby says that Russia is following a pattern similar to its earlier incursions that included installing illegitimate proxy officials in areas under its control in eastern Europe. The White House this week is predicting that Putin will call for a sham referendum in Ukraine to claim that the sovereign nation-state wants to join the Russian Federation. Kirby says the timeline for the Russian-sponsored “referendum” may coincide with regional elections scheduled for September 11. Already Russian banks are opening offices in eastern Ukraine, notes Defense One’s Jacqueline Feldscher. To give the appearance of normality, Moscow is forcing Ukrainians living in those eastern areas under its controls to apply for Russian citizenship and is issuing them new Russian passports. Feldscher reports that Kirby’s announcement is an example of Washington continuing to expose Putin’s gameplan so the world can be prepared for Russia’s next moves, and his attempts to obfuscate his intentions.

“Annexation by force would be a gross violation of the UN charter and we will not allow it to go unchallenged or unpunished,” says Kirby. The US, in response to Russian moves is sending additional weapons to Ukraine, including more HIMARS (High Mobility Artillery Rocket Systems). On Tuesday the top Ukrainian military official, Defense Minister Oleksii Reznikov, called the HIMARS, along with drones and longer-range rockets a “game changer.” He noted that the HIMARS already helped destroy 30 Russian command stations and an ammunition storage area, slowing Russia’s advance. The Defense Minister reported that his country is not using the weapons to attack inside Russian territory but is “using HIMARS systems precisely like… surgery.” He contrasted it with Russian strategy he compared to a “meat grinder” that has led to the deaths of hundreds of civilian casualties. Former US Ambassador to Ukraine, John Herbst, called the Biden Administration risk adverse and argued that it is too timid. “Instead of giving… all the HIMARS… and the longer ranges, they parceled it out in very small dosages.” It appears that protracted warfare will continue in Ukraine as Putin shows no signs of ending his “special operation.” Some military analysts in Washington now are questioning whether Putin intends to stop once the conflict in Ukraine ends or if, as in the past, the Russian leader will continue on his quest to remake the Russian empire. Looking a map outlining the borders of the old empire, Putin has not completed his adventure.

Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept.

Photo: Russian Defence Ministry

Quick Analysis

What does the Reversal of Harvey Weinstein’s Conviction Portend for Donald Trump?

In 2020, the New York County District Attorney’s Office scored a major conviction against a powerful Hollywood Producer – Harvey Weinstein. As described by Forbes, “Weinstein has faced scores of sexual harassment and assault accusations since 2017…[d]uring his New York trial, Weinstein was cleared of predatory sexual assault and rape in the first degree.” He was, however, convicted of Sexual Assault in the First Degree, and Rape in the Third Degree, and was sentenced to 23 years in prison. Recently, the New York State Court of Appeals has reversed Weinstein’s conviction, and sent the case back to the lower court for a retrial. While “Weinstein lawyer Arthur Aidala called the Court of Appeals ruling ‘a tremendous victory for every criminal defendant in the state of New York,’” the usual groups made the usual complaints. “Attorney Douglas H. Wigdor, who has represented eight Harvey Weinstein accusers including two witnesses at the New York criminal trial, called it ‘a major step back’…Debra Katz, a prominent civil rights and #MeToo attorney who represented several Weinstein accusers, said her clients are ‘feeling gutted’ by the ruling… “Allegations against Weinstein, the once powerful and feared studio boss behind such Oscar winners as ‘Pulp Fiction’ and ‘Shakespeare in Love,’ ushered in the #MeToo movement. Dozens of women came forward to accuse Weinstein, including stars such as Ashley Judd and Uma Thurman. His New York trial drew intense publicity, with protesters chanting ‘rapist’ outside the courthouse. ‘This is what it’s like to be a woman in America, living with male entitlement to our bodies,’ Judd said…” The New York Court of Appeals is known for being a left-of-center, activist court. Why would it reverse a conviction for rape entered against a character as reportedly heinous as Harvey Weinstein? Because despite its overall Progressive stance, even a notoriously leftist court knows an injustice when they see one. The decision to reverse Weinstein’s conviction is an important one. It underlines the necessity for fairness to all defendants, even unpopular ones accused of egregious crimes. The decision also has application to the ongoing case proceeding in New York County Supreme Court against former President Donald Trump. In May of 2023, we discussed the issue of whether or not Donald Trump’s indictment in New York County for actions that occurred in 2017 was beyond New York’s Statute of Limitations for prosecution of the criminal offenses with which he is charged. At that time, we noted the language of CPL Section 30.10(4)(A)(i), which excluded the time during which a defendant “was continuously outside this state.” This issue is also discussed in Chapter 6 of our book, The Making of a Marty – An Analysis of the Indictments of Donald Trump. We also stated that “it is entirely possible that the time Donald Trump spent in the White House, serving his country as the President of the United States, could be used against him in New York State Supreme Court.” Like Trump, Weinstein also spent many years outside the State of New York. “Prosecutors charged Weinstein with multiple crimes, including rape in the third degree for an alleged assault that occurred in March 2013. Weinstein was charged in May 2018, two months after the five-year statute of limitations on that offense would have expired. Weinstein challenged the charge, arguing it fell outside the statute of limitations and as a resident of New York state the extension wouldn’t apply to him. Prosecutors used records from ‘United States Customs and Border Control’ to show that Weinstein had been out of New York for 193 days during that five-year period– more than the 68 days needed to capture the earlier conduct. The judge rejected Weinstein’s argument and allowed the charge to stand.” Judge Wilson’s article concludes tomorrow Photo: Pixabay