Anastasia Battle

On the International Peace Coalition #60, it was decided to endorse and publish a special appeal from Romanian Peace Activists the termination of any agreements in the Romanian Parliament, and other nations, the support of Military Aide to Ukraine. Below is the petition that is currently in circulation.

STOP THE MADNESS TOGETHER! STOP THE WAR! Make peace!

To the citizens of: Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Spain, Sweden, Slovenia, United Kingdom, United States of America, Czech Republic, Japan

READ YOUR COUNTRY’S AGREEMENT WITH UKRAINE AND ANALYZE THE IMPLICATIONS!

In the year 2024, Ukraine signed bilateral treaties at the state level with 24 countries and the European Union.

In all of these agreements there are clauses of ”consultations within 24 hours”, at the request of Ukraine or the signatory state, to react to the current conflict between Russia and Ukraine, in case of a new armed attack by Russia or in case of an armed attack by Russia after the end of the present hostilities.

Three of the countries that have signed bilateral agreements – ROMANIA, POLAND AND LITHUANIA – have expressly mentioned in the agreements that “in the event of a significant escalation of the current aggression” they will support Ukraine to counter or limit the aggression. 

If these agreements are put into practice, the Russian-Ukrainian war could expand regionally or globally, if only one NATO country officially joins the war.

The content of these treaties and the declarations of the 2024 NATO Summit show that the aim is not to achieve peace between Russia and Ukraine, but to maintain the war and expand it. 

At the same time, from a legal point of view, the “24 hours of consultation” clauses in the 24 treaties:

– are contained in different articles, which apply under different premises, have different wording and different effects from country to country;

– the names of the articles in some treaties are misleading – ‘future armed attack’, ‘future aggression’ – but their content suggests that they can also be applied to the current armed conflict; 

– the wording is ambiguous, unclear and leaves room for interpretation, thus helping to counter any current criticism by claiming that the interpretation is in fact different;

– concerning between whom the “24-hour consultations” take place: the treaties contain different provisions. Some don’t mention anything, meaning that they will take place between Ukraine and the signatory country. Others mention that the two signatory countries will also consult with representatives of other interested states that have concluded agreements with Ukraine. Others mention that the two signatory countries will consult “in a bilateral format or through other channels as they both deem acceptable” (not sure what could mean channels that are considered acceptable as an alternative to bilateral consultations); 

– regarding the assistance to be given to Ukraine following the “24-hour consultations” in some treaties it is mentioned that the signatory state will act in accordance with its legal, constitutional requirements, in accordance with international and European law. In other treaties there is no such mention, which would mean that the treaty is applied “directly” without further internal “analysis or approvals”; 

– on the purpose of the “24-hour consultations”: in some treaties it is mentioned as being to “counter or deter aggression”, in others to determine the necessary steps.

Only in the bilateral treaties concluded by Ukraine with 3 states (Romania, Poland, Lithuania) there are express provisions that “consultations within 24 hours” apply to the current Russian-Ukrainian military conflict. 

 In the other treaties: the case of application of this clause is clearly defined in some (in case of a future armed conflict or new aggression by Russia, after the cessation of current hostilities), and ambiguous in others (a future armed attack by Russia, without mentioning whether in the framework of the current conflict or a future conflict).

Please consider the content of the treaty concluded by your state and let us together oppose the extension of the Russian-Ukrainian war, call for an end to this war and for peace.

The appeal features excerps from every treaty with the internet link to the original text here: 

In Romania, a petition was launched by Radu on the 22nd of July and a law proposal was made by independent Parliamentarian Dumitru Coarnă, supported by 25 others, asking for the cancellation of the Romanian agreement. Mr. Coarnă also filed a criminal complaint against the President of Romania, Klaus Iohannis, and the members of the Romanian Security Council (CSAT) for committing the crimes of high treason and subservience to a foreign power, provoking war against the country and facilitating foreign military occupation and undermining the economic, political or defense capacity of the state.  The petition, as well as the law proposal are being supported in Romania by a national mobilization of a small, but determined minority of civil rights activists.

Excerpts from the Romanian online petition launched on the 22th of July by Elena Radu:

To:

The Romanian Parliament 
Representatives of all Romanian state authorities 

We, the citizens of Romania, request the Romanian Parliament and all Representatives of the Romanian state authorities:

1.      To convene, as a matter of urgency, an extraordinary session of the Romanian Parliament for the approval of the “Legislative proposal on the declaration of nullity of the Agreement on security cooperation between Romania and Ukraine, signed in Washington, on July 10, 2024”, registered at the Permanent Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies under no. 471/15.07.2024;

2.      The adoption by Romania of a neutral position towards the armed conflict between Russia and Ukraine;

3.      The termination of any agreements/treaties/conventions by which Romania has engaged to provide military aid, military technology or any instruction and training of Ukrainian military personnel;

4. Romania to take the necessary steps, at the diplomatic level, in order to start negotiations on a peace treaty on feasible terms between Russia and Ukraine and to cease any steps and actions which could widen and perpetuate the Russian-Ukrainian conflict;

5.      Non-involvement of Romania in any diplomatic and military/armed conflict anywhere in the world;

6. The respect by senators, deputies, prime minister and ministers, the President of Romania, the Romanian armed forces and by all representatives of public authorities in Romania of the will of the Romanian people expressed in points 1-5 »

The petition explains then, with extended technical details, that what the Romanian President signed was no agreement, but a treaty and that treaties have to be ratified by the Romanian Parliament. This important step was omitted by the Romanian president, Klaus Iohannis, and in consequence this agreement/treaty can not come into force and has to be cancelled.

It goes on as follows: 

We note from the content of the Agreement:
1. that Romania undertakes to cede part of the national defense system and to make financial expenditures to support Ukraine in the war with Russia, while Romania’s public budget is in excessive deficit and the public debt has increased exponentially in the last 4 years, with a major impact on the quality of life of the Romanian people;  

2. that Romania’s national defense system is becoming non-existent, with the Agreement focusing only on helping Ukraine to develop its industrial and national defense system;

3. that the agreement is bilateral but contains obligations only for Romania;

4. the granting of aid to Ukraine, under the conditions mentioned in the Agreement, in order to defend Ukraine against Russian aggression until Ukraine wins the war;  

5. in view of the provisions of the Agreement stating that Romania will help to counter Russia’s aggression against Ukraine (which has been constant for more than 2 and a half years), this aid may be interpreted by Russia as a declaration of war by Romania. In such a situation, there is an imminent risk of an extension of the armed conflict and the declaration of a state of war on Romanian territory, with the consequence of mobilizing citizens to participate on the front line, given Romania’s constitutional obligations to defend itself.  

All this has created negative reactions in the public space and in the Romanian society, because this Agreement endangers peace in Romania, affects the national defense and the economic stability of Romania, involving unacceptable expenses and sacrifices for the Romanian people.

We recall that according to art. 118 para. (2) of the Romanian Constitution, Romania’s army is subject exclusively to the will of the Romanian people.

In conclusion, it is necessary to respect the will of the Romanian people, who want peace and not the extension of wars, and to declare null and void the Agreement on security cooperation between Romania and Ukraine, signed on behalf of Romania by the President of Romania with Ukraine on July 10, 2024.

On 15.07.2024 was registered at the Permanent Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies a “Legislative proposal on the declaration of nullity of the Agreement on security cooperation between Romania and Ukraine, signed in Washington, on July 10, 2024”, under no. 471/15.07.2024.

Given that the Romanian Parliament is on holiday until September, it is necessary to urgently convene an extraordinary session to vote on the legislative proposal registered at the Permanent Bureau of the Chamber of Deputies under no. 471/15.07.2024. 

(…)

July 4—We, the undersigned, welcome the renewed peace initiative of the President of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Putin, as currently presented in his speech at the Russian Foreign Ministry on June 14, 2024. We urge the commencement of a diplomatic process forthwith, not withstanding the present state of hostilities between NATO/Ukraine and Russia. 

Time is of the essence. Any further escalation heightens the danger that the present conflagration will escalate to the level of region-wide war, or even thermonuclear confrontation, and that far more quickly than might be imagined. To ensure that this does not happen, we should follow this advice: “Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. Let both sides explore what problems unite us, instead of belaboring those problems which divide us.” 

Those words, of American President John F. Kennedy, were echoed by his adversary, Russian Premier Nikita Khrushchev, in a letter he wrote to JFK:”I have participated in two world wars, and know that war only ends when it has carved its way across cities and villages, bringing death and destruction in its wake.” That has been the unnecessary toll in this war, a war that could have concluded over two years ago, by the end of March, 2022. Instead, through the clearly-documented intervention of the UK’s Boris Johnson and NATO, the already-negotiated proposal for peace between Russia and Ukraine was scuttled. Hundreds of thousands of lives were unnecessarily sacrificed as a result. 

The Putin June 14, 2024 proposal is the world’s opportunity to “get back on track.” It could prove the first step in creating a new international strategic architecture, to replace the now-dead post-1989/91 “unipolar” construct. This June 14 peace initiative is a successor to a series of failed, sabotaged, but persistent peace attempts, as openly documented to the world in the conclusion and attempted implementation of Minsk-2 in 2015, as well as in the willingness to negotiate even after the commencement of Russia’s Special Military Operation, February 24, 2022. It was seen in the March, 2022 treaty that was initialed by both Russian and Ukrainian official representatives, but never adopted, because of Boris Johnson’s imperial intervention.

We here declare, emphatically, that the goal of dismembering Russia by using the Ukraine conflict as a springboard for regime change there, is clearly a madman’s enterprise in the era of thermonuclear weapons. In view of the suffering caused by war and aggression, and the danger of this conflict escalating into a Third World War, broad support for this initiative is an important expression of the will of all rational people to survive.

The war-mongering, and profit and revenge-driven calls for Russia to be defeated, are based on the mistaken assumption that the theater of war—including nuclear war—can be limited. This was not, however, the case in either the First or Second World Wars. Through today’s military capabilities, which can reach any target in the world in the shortest possible time, such a “limited war” assumption is evidence of a huge misjudgment of the reality of our time. Those calling for war, and against negotiations, mistakenly believe that they might have a safe chance of survival. In thermonuclear war, there is no hiding place.

To repeat: We urge the commencement of a diplomatic process forthwith, not withstanding the present state of war between NATO/Ukraine and Russia. To this end, we urge the Ukraine Rada to rescind the order preventing direct negotiations with Russia. We fully support the construction of a new security architecture for Europe and indeed for the world. We urge the warring parties – and those in supporting roles – to come together in good faith to negotiate a lasting peace based upon mutually beneficial economic relationships among the countries involved.

    Specifically, we recommend the following steps: 

    First, to begin initial discussions, based upon the Russian peace proposal of June 14, 2024. 

    Second, based on progress in those initial discussions, to seek the earliest possible declaration of an agreed upon ceasefire in the conflict. 

    Third, once an agreed-upon ceasefire’s terms have been set to paper, reinforce and strengthen trust through a new economic architecture, including forces from outside of the conflict that have advanced various proposals for advancing peace. 

We must, with regard to these negotiations, not only remember, but re-commit to the lessons of the Peace of Westphalia that ended the Thirty Years War: a lasting peace requires that one take into account “the interest of the other, ” and all others, for that matter. “No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings.” That was the conviction of Kennedy and Khrushchev, who as leaders, faced a moment when they, together, might have destroyed all human life, perhaps forever. They negotiated, and humanity prevailed. We stand, perhaps not yet in, but very close to that very same place now. We must not fail.