Tucker Carlson at the Bolshoi Ballet (threadbans in op)

I'm trying to think of where I initially heard that Russia withdrew it's support for the Budapest Memorandum, besides the conversation between Putin & Bill Clinton in 2011. I believe I heard it on a geo political podcast but don't know the exact date.

I would certainly expect that Putin or the Russian Foreign Ministry would circulate letters to the stakeholders formally informing them. But I don't know if that was ever done. And I'm supposing it wasn't done.

What I can say, is that Russia has expressed that they are not bound to elements (for example the territorial sovereignty of Ukraine) as spelled out in the Budapest Memorandum - since the 2014 coup in Ukraine. Though I admin this doesn't equal a formal withdrawal from that agreement.

But it's a common theme among statements from the Russian Foreign Ministry.

" The only thing absent from the Budapest Memorandum is an obligation on the part of Russia or anyone else to agree with the results of an anti-constitutional armed coup d’etat, led by people who made it their first act to proclaim a fight against the Russian language and Russians in Crimea. I can quote the former leader of the Right Sector, Dmitry Yarosh, who said that, “Russians should be driven out of Crimea or exterminated.” No one had any obligation to accept political changes of this kind in Ukraine under leaders of this sort. When they violated the agreements of February 20, 2014 and ignored their obligation to form a government of national unity under guarantees from France, Poland and Germany, the Ukrainian coup leaders flagrantly violated the Budapest Memorandum’s terms regarding the need to respect in full Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. "

Essentially, the Russian Foreign Ministry says that there's only one legal obligation they agreed to: not to use nuclear weapons against the newly formed independent states. Everything else was pinky promises that were negated in this instance by the illegal coup government in Ukraine.

Wasn't it you that claimed the Budapest Memorandum was a Treaty?

Where did you hear that canard other than the closed information bubble of western media?

The rights and wrongs of the Budapest violations by Russia can be argued on the Russia thread. Similar for the semantics as to whether it is a treaty or agreement. 

What is without doubt is that Russia lied about Budapest and violated it, and it is proof of their bad faith towards Ukraine and breach of public, formally declared signed commitments. Instead of focusing on the substance of those violations, you have preferred to drag the thread down a semantic rabbit hole.

If the western media has a "closed information bubble" about Budapest, then it should be the case that all mentions of Budapest in Western media describe it as a treaty. They don't do they? There are numerous articles in Western media discussing the nature of Budapest and its implications \ obligations. Do they all describe it as a treaty? Nope.

In relation to this thread, you repeatedly posted as a statement false claims about public Russian withdrawal from Budapest, claims which you were completely unable to substantiate, and which the Guardian article you linked did not support.

This discredits your claims of the need for this interview to puncture what you called the "information bubble". You appear to be in an information bubble entirely of your own making.

And remind us again what probing questions did Tucker Carlson ask Putin about Budapest and the NATO Russia Founding Act?

Whether I hammering out a post called it a treaty or not is beside the point. I was discussing treaties and political agreements, which included Budapest and the NATO Russia Founding Act. And to re-iterate the point you continually ignore, the NATO Russia Founding Act lays out the framework for NATO expansion including NATO expansion to Ukraine, and Russia formally accepted NATO's right to expand in signing that treaty.

Whether you call Budapest a treaty, agreement or memorandum, it was a formal public commitment by Russia, not just to Ukraine but to other UN Security council members. Russia, as a UN security council member, also implicitly formally accepted Ukraine's sovereignty when Ukraine joined the UN. So it shows how much stock to put in Russian commitments and promises.

I did not make a statement of fact that Budapest was a treaty and continue stating that when asked for evidence to the contrary.

And unlike the unfounded claim you continually repeated about Russia publicly disclaiming the treaty to other signatories - Which you could not stand over, which the only media article you could provide contradicted your claims. If you wanted a second opinion on the claim you heard in the podcast, you could have found it elsewhere in Western media. The contradictions in your own posts and articles \ podcasts referenced are irrefutable proof there is no single fixed set of opinions\facts\statements about it in Western media.

In terms of the Western media, there is abundant information about it, discussing its nature, and Russian violations of it - the notion that it is presented in a uniform manner by Western media in some sort of 'closed information bubble' is therefore entirely discredited.

Oh so they are 'narratives' now? Is that your word for Putin's output of self serving propaganda and lies?

As for your claim of a so-called 'confrontational' interview, I rejected the premise that it would be 'confrontational' for Carlson merely to ask Putin questions about basic history of Russia Ukraine relations in posts #465 and #474 about the "narrative" of propaganda and lies presented. So asked and answered.

But I suppose when Putin has had journalists murdered, tortured and imprisoned for less, anything other than a nodding lapdog would look like a confrontation wouldn't it?

Which shows why Carlson should not have given a platform to Putin's propaganda and lies.

There was no need to puncture what you call the closed information bubble in Western media for the simple fact there is no such bubble, as your own posts prove, and besides other than trying to excuse Hitler all Putin's canards have been circulated already and discredited.

Wait, isn't Putin supposed to be against Nazis ... oops another lie from him. Quelle surprise.

Genocide? Puleeze!

Considering subscribing to your newsletter: please explain in your own words how Russia is not engaged in genocide against the Ukrainians?

The big difference is, we have plenty of evidence that genocidal acts have occurred. Russification, kidnapping of children, attacking residential areas including children's hospitals. The international criminal court even have a warrant out for Putin's arrest.

Anyway, why exactly should we take your opinion seriously if you seem to laugh off genocide? Do you even recognise the various crimes?

Crazy. Boris knows that his bombastic sound bites amount to nothing, and is outright afraid of being revealed.

It was a defensive act the Serbs had proven themselves genocidal in srebrenica in 1995 bringing violence not seen in Europe for 50 years and there was no reason to believe that they would not do the same in Kosovo.

Nice mental gymnastics there.

So the Serbs should have been let do whatever the hell they want ?

So you’re not comfortable with the prevention of genocide ??? The subsequent period of peace in that region since 1999 utterly validates that action.