How Russia can force Ukraine to pay for Crimea


Less than seven years have passed since Ukraine stopped supplying water to Crimea, when the republic's authorities decided to sue Kiev for it. The amount of damage caused by Nezalezhnaya is estimated at 10-20 trillion rubles. A lot. But what are the chances of actually recovering something from the Ukrainian side?


So, what is the essence of the question. After the reunification of the peninsula with the Russian Federation following the results of a popular referendum, Kiev first stopped supplying water through the North Crimean Canal, and then cut off the power supply. As a result, Crimea suffered significant property damage: without the Dnieper water in this region, all rice growing was de facto destroyed, and other sectors of agriculture also suffered. Because of this, both regional and federal authorities were forced to invest heavily in eliminating the consequences of Ukrainian "sabotage". This explains such an impressive amount of the claim. The first deputy chairman of the State Council of Crimea, Efim Fix, voiced it in the amount of 10 to 20 trillion rubles. Currently, a team of international lawyers is being formed, which will represent the interests of the peninsula in court.

In Ukraine, of course, neighing was over this. I would like to draw your attention to the opinion of the representative of the Ukrainian "law school". A certain Aleksey Reznikov, the Minister of "Temporarily Occupied Territories" Nezalezhnaya, who, in his own words, "has been engaged in law all his life," said the following:

It is like “urinating against the wind”, since Kiev relies on the Geneva Convention, where it is written in black and white “the occupier is responsible for the civilian population in the territory he has occupied”.

I would like to note on this occasion.

At first, I would like to urge the Ukrainian "colleagues" to finally decide what is going on in their heads. They claim that Crimea was "annexed", now it turns out to be "occupied". Friends, these are fundamentally different, mutually exclusive things. Let's turn to the generally accepted definitions.

Occupation is the occupation by the armed forces of a state of a territory that does not belong to it, not accompanied by the acquisition of sovereignty over it and carried out in the absence of the will of the state possessing sovereignty over the given territory, usually temporary.

The key point is that the occupation is not accompanied by the acquisition of sovereignty over foreign territory by the occupying state. The Republic of Crimea and the hero city of Sevastopol became part of the Russian Federation, which then gained sovereignty over them. Consequently, the references to the Geneva Convention, which the Ukrainian “lawyer” makes, that “he has been studying law all his life,” are absolutely inappropriate. Now with regard to the "annexation" of Crimea. Occupation and annexation are fundamentally different things that exclude each other.

Annexation is the forcible annexation by a state of all or part of the territory of another state unilaterally.

Sevastopol and Crimea became part of Russia not as a result of a war of conquest, but as a result of a national referendum, in which the absolute majority of the inhabitants of the peninsula spoke in favor of joining it. The very process of joining was formalized by bilateral agreements with new subjects of the federation. There was nothing "violent" here. Yes, the Russian servicemen ensured the safety of the plebescite, but no one forced the Crimeans to vote “correctly”. The fact that Crimea was the most pro-Russian region within Ukraine is a medical fact. Nobody annexed it - this is also an indisputable fact.

Okay, everything is clear with Ukrainian would-be lawyers. Now about the "rzhach" in the comments. Yes, the amount is large and it is not possible to recover it in international courts, which in principle stand on the side of Independent. But the question is, why should we go to European courts at all?

The damage has been caused to the Russian region, and therefore the claim must be considered in a Russian court. I would like to remind you that in the "Yeltsin" Constitution of 1993 a rule was spelled out that international law has priority over our national law. It said the following:

If other rules are established by an international treaty of the Russian Federation than those provided by law, the rules of the international treaty shall apply.

However, after the events of 2014 around Ukraine, Moscow began the process of sovereignization of its legal system. In 2015, the Constitutional Court of the Russian Federation was empowered to reject decisions of international courts against Russia containing claims for the payment of certain compensation. At the same time, the Ministry of Justice of the Russian Federation prepared a bill giving our country the right to seize property of another state on its territory without its consent. In this case, one should be guided by the principle of reciprocity: that is, to apply these norms in relation to countries that themselves are trying to seize Russian assets within the framework of their equal value.

Thus, within the framework of this logic, the appeal of the Crimean authorities to the Russian court with a claim against Ukraine is a politically correct and long overdue step.
50 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
    aquarius580 20 March 2021 11: 55
    -9
    You, of course, consider the Ukrainians to be "roguly" and "farmers", but you still have to understand that under no circumstances will Ukraine supply water to a military base from which missiles are aimed at it.
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 20 March 2021 12: 27
      0
      Ukrainians are different, just like Russians.
      As for "under no circumstances", it will come back to haunt Ukraine in the end.
      1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
        aquarius580 20 March 2021 13: 18
        -12%
        Yes already backfired. All over the country there are thousands of graves of soldiers and officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, who believed that there was a "brotherly state" nearby.
        1. Vladest Offline Vladest
          Vladest (Vladimir) 20 March 2021 18: 48
          -4
          Quote: aquarius580
          Across the country - thousands of graves of soldiers and officers of the Armed Forces of Ukraine

          When there is a war, they compare the losses of all the belligerents. By not mentioning your losses, you are showing disrespect for your lost.
          1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
            aquarius580 20 March 2021 23: 44
            -8
            In Ukraine, the dead are buried with all military honors.
            Russian losses are brought to relatives in a box by the postman Pechkin, along with a copy of the Tsar's decree banning disclosure.
            1. Ronin Offline Ronin
              Ronin (Ronin) 21 March 2021 11: 45
              +2
              In the ditches, yours lie and rot along the railway dead ends in the Kharkov and other neighboring regions. You have officially recognized hardly 10% of the losses of the Armed Forces of Ukraine
        2. Joker62 Offline Joker62
          Joker62 (Ivan) 20 March 2021 18: 50
          0
          There was no need to fight the Donbass! And Nikolai Ryzhkov, the first and last prime minister of the USSR, was right. Donbass must be negotiated humanly, not bestial!
          So, there would be no bestial attitude towards the Donbass and if the junta of Banderlog had not come to power in Ukraine - there would be no mass graves!
          And to nod at the guilt of Russia in the affairs of Ukraine is already a right, ridiculous and stupid ...
          1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
            aquarius580 20 March 2021 23: 48
            -7
            Ukraine is not at war with Donbass. Ukraine is fighting a foreign army and its local collaborators.
            On March 1, 2014, the state flags of Ukraine were stripped from the building of the city administration of Donetsk and replaced by Russian ones. There was not a single Ukrainian serviceman and not a single volunteer. There was still a month and a half left before the order to start the ATO.
        3. Ronin Offline Ronin
          Ronin (Ronin) 21 March 2021 11: 40
          +2
          Well, if Ukraine is not obliged to supply water to Crimea, then the Russian Federation is not obliged to supply water to Ukraine. I remember the Dnieper and not he alone, originate in the Russian Federation, and the Russian Federation does not have enough water in the Don and Volga, so God himself ordered the Ukrainians to shut off the water and use it for the needs of the Russian Federation ... As for the brotherhood, it’s even funny to listen to. .. Why did you go to Chechnya and Ossetia to kill brothers in order to earn money ?! What did you organize the genocide of the Russian people? Damn you Dillies brother, not the Russian Federation!
        4. Vladimir Kondakov (Vladimir Kondakov) 23 March 2021 13: 22
          +1
          And to wage war with the citizens of their state (after all, residents of Lugansk and Donetsk and their environs with Ukrainian passports), conducting military operations, is so brotherly.
          1. Igor Berg Offline Igor Berg
            Igor Berg (Igor Berg) 28 March 2021 09: 57
            -1
            similarly about its citizens in Chechnya
    2. silver169 Offline silver169
      silver169 (Aristarkh Feliksovich) 20 March 2021 12: 31
      +1
      Not all Ukrainians, or rather Little Russians, but only the Bandera bastard who carried out a coup in 2014. These really are rogules, which it is high time to destroy. As for the supply of water to the peninsula, I will remind you of the proverb "do not be dashing while it is quiet." Putin, of course, is a very patient and restrained person, but everything has limits and no matter how soon it turns out that the Bandera clique will be left without Dnieper water. That's when you will shake your obos.r.a.n. with your trousers that there will be nowhere to wash ...
      1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
        aquarius580 20 March 2021 13: 20
        -7
        Well, then your Trumpet will fly up into the air. Nobody canceled the boomerang law.

        Bandera bastard who carried out a coup in 2014

        - from Dnepropetrovsk Turchynov, Odessa citizens Poroshenko and Poltorak, Vinnitsa Jew Groisman?
        Treat your head, dear.
        1. alexneg13 Offline alexneg13
          alexneg13 (Alexander) 17 May 2021 01: 18
          0
          Well, if the pipe flies into the air, then Europe itself will tear off your "eggs" and on this project Ukraine will stop until the end of the World, and Russia will be untied to clean up the w / Bandera filth at the root.
          1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
            aquarius580 17 May 2021 01: 24
            -1
            Have you accurately weighed the amount of forces required for "cleansing"? The Armed Forces of Ukraine together with mobbezrev - several hundred thousand soldiers and officers who passed the front. In the event of a massive attack on Ukraine, the aggressor will receive a full-scale guerrilla war for several decades. Are you ready for it? You have already explained to the guys from Pskov, Penza, Kostroma, etc. - why should they die in a neighboring state?
    3. Russobel Offline Russobel
      Russobel (Andrei) 21 March 2021 11: 59
      -2
      Quote: aquarius580
      You, of course, consider the Ukrainians to be "roguly" and "farmers", but you still have to understand that under no circumstances will Ukraine supply water to a military base from which missiles are aimed at it.

      For the property of Ukraine that is confiscated by the court, a water pipeline will be built from the Russian Dnieper directly to the Crimea, it will also remain soaked)
    4. Kedrovich Offline Kedrovich
      Kedrovich (Alexa980) 21 March 2021 22: 16
      +2
      Yes, let them not serve. People in Crimea will be healthier. Drink your Ukrainians your own Dnieper water with strontium-90 and cesium-137 from Chernobyl. It's even good that they stopped it on time. Otherwise, it's not a good thing to drink radioactive water and water the Crimean land with it, turning it into a new Chernobyl.
    5. Tungsten Molybdenum (Tungsten Molybdenum) 16 May 2021 13: 33
      0
      What about Russian water

  2. steelmaker Offline steelmaker
    steelmaker 20 March 2021 12: 46
    0
    When will you stop talking to the fascist regime, the language of the law? After the Ukrainian authorities refused to return the legitimate loan of $ 3 billion, it is only complete fools who can hope that something can be obtained from them according to the law. They insolently laugh and scoff at Russia and the Russian people. After all, Ukraine, in economic terms, is almost entirely dependent on Russia. It's easy to limit the supply of something in exchange for water for Crimea. There are many other ways as well. There is no political will of the authorities! Mediocrities rule!
  3. Bulanov Offline Bulanov
    Bulanov (Vladimir) 20 March 2021 13: 17
    +1
    But was the GDR country occupied, or annexed by the FRG country?
    1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
      aquarius580 20 March 2021 13: 49
      -5
      There was a unification of two independent states into one. Nobody cut off a piece of territory from anyone; the foreign army was not included.
      1. Ronin Offline Ronin
        Ronin (Ronin) 21 March 2021 11: 51
        +2
        Well, and then the return of the Russian Crimea, illegally annexed by Ukraine, took place. I remember in 1954 your Ukrop grabbers, who seized power in the USSR with the help of a military coup, no referendums were held either in the RSFSR or in Crimea ... And the Supreme Soviet of the Russian Federation, by its resolution No. 2809-1 of May 21, 1992, recognized the transfer of Crimea to Ukraine in 1954 illegal.
    2. Vladest Offline Vladest
      Vladest (Vladimir) 20 March 2021 18: 54
      -8
      Quote: Bulanov
      But was the GDR country occupied, or annexed by the FRG country?

      You haven't come up with the third option. The GDR was created from a piece of Germany that the USSR appropriated for itself. The people on the territory of the future GDR were not asked even if they wanted to go there or not. When the USSR died, the GDR and the FRG returned to their historical reality.
    3. Natan bruk Offline Natan bruk
      Natan bruk (Natan Bruk) 20 March 2021 19: 52
      -3
      As for the absorption of the GDR, not a single country had any claims against the FRG.
      1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
        Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 08: 05
        0
        What's with Bindyuzhnik? Where did you disappear to? Now you have to write comments for two.
  4. Natan bruk Offline Natan bruk
    Natan bruk (Natan Bruk) 20 March 2021 13: 40
    -4
    Marzhetsky, according to international laws, that in the case of occupation, or in case of annexation, the life support of the occupied / annexed territories falls on the occupied / annexed country. So your lawyers have zero chances. Well, objectively, you yourself admit that Crimea was annexed and Russia considers it to be its part - so why should another country provide it with water? And if you are already talking about a "national referendum", then it is worth recalling that the UN recognized it as illegal, and in this case, what kind of appeal to international courts can we talk about?
    1. Ronin Offline Ronin
      Ronin (Ronin) 21 March 2021 11: 52
      +2
      Well, if Ukraine is not obliged to supply water to Crimea, then the Russian Federation is not obliged to supply water to Ukraine. I remember the Dnieper and not he alone, originate in the Russian Federation, and the Russian Federation does not have enough water in the Don and Volga, so God himself ordered the Ukrainians to shut off the water and use it for the needs of the Russian Federation.
      1. Natan bruk Offline Natan bruk
        Natan bruk (Natan Bruk) 21 March 2021 14: 21
        0
        Well, cover up who does not give you.
  5. Cyril Offline Cyril
    Cyril (Kirill) 20 March 2021 13: 51
    -4
    First, I would like to urge the Ukrainian “colleagues” to finally decide what is going on in their heads. They claim that Crimea was "annexed", now it turns out to be "occupied". Friends, these are fundamentally different, mutually exclusive things. Let's turn to the generally accepted definitions.

    Despite the fact that the terms are really different, in fact "Ukrainian colleagues" are right.

    If it is an occupation, then Russia is responsible for the population of Crimea according to the Geneva Convention.

    If the annexation (let's discard the illegal status of the action itself) - Russia is responsible for the population of Crimea, since it considers this territory to be its own.

    In both cases, Russia is responsible for providing the Crimean population with everything it needs.

    Well, there was still an occupation. And it was BEFORE the referendum was held.

    First, there was a complete blocking of the peninsula (including administrative institutions) by Russian troops, which undoubtedly falls under the definition:

    Occupation - the occupation by the armed forces of a state of a territory that does not belong to it, not accompanied by the acquisition of sovereignty over it and carried out in the absence of the will of the state that has sovereignty over the given territory

    The fact that this occupation was justified - "ensuring security" or something else - does not change the essence of the matter.
  6. amateur Offline amateur
    amateur (Victor) 20 March 2021 14: 09
    +3
    Quote: aquarius580
    Well it will fly into the air then your Trumpet... Nobody canceled the boomerang law.

    Bandera the bastard who staged a coup in 2014

    - from Dnepropetrovsk Turchynov, Odessa citizens Poroshenko and Poltorak, Vinnitsa Jew Groisman?
    Treat your head, dear.

    The presence of a saucepan on the head dramatically reduces brain activity. To confuse the city of BENDER with the followers of BENDER, who can live both in Odessa and in Dnepropetrovsk - this is an end user statement.
    Well, Gazprom is tired of waiting for the Banderites to finally blow up the transit gas pipe that belongs to the Ukrainian Naftogaz and for the use of which the budget of Ukraine receives $ 1-1.5 billion a year. I am sure that Gazprom will pay for a three-year "all inclusive" vacation in the Canaries for all participants in the explosion.
  7. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
    Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 20 March 2021 15: 59
    -4
    Thus, within the framework of this logic, the appeal of the Crimean authorities to the Russian court with a claim against Ukraine is a politically correct and long overdue step.

    - this logic is voiced in an old bearded anecdote, when the drunk shit under other people's doors, then called and asked for a piece of paper to wipe ...
    1. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
      Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 07: 56
      0
      You will better decide which side you are on.
      1. Igor Pavlovich Offline Igor Pavlovich
        Igor Pavlovich (Igor Pavlovich) 21 March 2021 11: 14
        -2
        So I decided long ago - no matter how pathetic it sounds, I am on the side of the peoples of Russia and categorically against the current Kremlin clique that usurped power in the country and plunges it into economic and political chaos as a result, as it is written in the Bible,

        being darkened in reason, alienated from the Glory of God because of their ignorance and hardness of their hearts
        1. Ronin Offline Ronin
          Ronin (Ronin) 21 March 2021 11: 55
          +2
          Ukrainians have nothing to do with the indigenous population of the Russian Federation, so you are essentially a bandit, in the service of a foreign state - Ukraine, who should be deprived of Russian citizenship and deported from the Russian Federation VON, for anti-Russian activities in the interests of Ukraine. Let there you be granted citizenship, if they deem it necessary, and in the Russian Federation, prison misses people like you
        2. Igor Berg Offline Igor Berg
          Igor Berg (Igor Berg) 28 March 2021 09: 59
          0
          so the whole world has already heard who the killer is
  8. Vladest Offline Vladest
    Vladest (Vladimir) 20 March 2021 18: 43
    -5
    The victim also owes something to the aggressor. Impudence is above the head.
  9. Victor Yakushev Offline Victor Yakushev
    Victor Yakushev (Victor Yakushev) 21 March 2021 06: 14
    -1
    This is unheard-of rudeness, how this Ukraine dares not to give water to Our Crimea ...
  10. Victor Yakushev Offline Victor Yakushev
    Victor Yakushev (Victor Yakushev) 21 March 2021 06: 24
    0
    This war, in addition to losses, will lead to a resonance of opinions and, as a consequence, the conflict and the fraction of Russia as a state into parts ...
  11. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 07: 48
    +1
    Quote: Natan Bruk
    Marzhetsky, according to international laws, that in the case of occupation, or in case of annexation, the life support of the occupied / annexed territories falls on the occupied / annexed country. So your lawyers have zero chances. Well, objectively, you yourself admit that Crimea was annexed and Russia considers it to be its part - so why should another country provide it with water?

    What kind of nonsense? In the article I have chewed in detail why there was no occupation or annexation. He also explained why there is no need to go to international courts. Do you even read what you comment on? Or spar right away according to the training manual?
    And where did I admit that Crimea was annexed? May I have a quote?
  12. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 07: 51
    +2
    Quote: Cyril
    Well, there was still an occupation. And it was BEFORE the referendum was held.

    First, there was a complete blocking of the peninsula (including administrative institutions) by Russian troops, which undoubtedly falls under the definition:

    This was not an occupation. Russian troops on the peninsula were in accordance with the treaty. They had to act in an extraordinary situation of a coup d'etat in Ukraine to protect the local population, when there was a threat that "trains of friendship" and so on would go to Crimea.
    Also, the "Ukrainian colleague" proceeds in his conclusions from the fact that the "occupation" allegedly continues to this day, even the ministry is called that. This is fundamentally wrong, which speaks of the complete inadequacy of the Ukrainian government and its "lawyers".
    So, with all due respect, don't la-la. You are wrong in your position, it is biased and anti-Russian.
    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
      Cyril (Kirill) 23 March 2021 14: 41
      +1
      Russian troops on the peninsula were in accordance with the treaty.

      This treaty provided for the strict localization of Russian troops at Russian military bases. Certainly, this agreement did not provide for blocking the entrance routes to the peninsula, Ukrainian administrative institutions and military bases.

      So no, it was exactly the occupation.

      They had to act in the extraordinary situation of a coup d'etat in Ukraine to protect the local population, when there was a threat that "trains of friendship" and so on would go to Crimea.

      The coup d'état in Kiev is, as the GDP is expressed, an "internal affair of Ukraine," in which Russia does not seem to interfere. So "extraordinary circumstances" is just an excuse. Not the most skillful, besides.

      Also, the "Ukrainian colleague" proceeds in his conclusions from the fact that the "occupation" allegedly continues to this day.

      The "Ukrainian colleague", even if he is mistaken in the wording, is right about one thing - Russia should be responsible for providing the population of Crimea with water. Whichever side you look at.

      You are wrong in your position, it is biased and anti-Russian.

      Fu, Sergei, well, you are not Necropny or Kharaluzhny, let's not operate with such extremely vague and propagandistic terms.
  13. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 08: 01
    +2
    Quote: aquarius580
    Well, then your Trumpet will fly up into the air. Nobody canceled the boomerang law.

    Not the worst option, by the way. After all, this is YOUR pipe. Then the relevance of the SP-2 will grow.
  14. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 08: 17
    +1
    Quote: Cyril
    Well, there was still an occupation. And it was BEFORE the referendum was held.

    First, there was a complete blocking of the peninsula (including administrative institutions) by Russian troops, which undoubtedly falls under the definition:

    Occupation - the occupation by the armed forces of a state of a territory that does not belong to it, not accompanied by the acquisition of sovereignty over it and carried out in the absence of the will of the state that has sovereignty over the given territory

    The fact that this occupation was justified - "ensuring security" or something else - does not change the essence of the matter.

    Again. The last one. This was not an occupation.
    The maximum that is suitable here is:
    Humanitarian intervention or humanitarian war - the use of military force against a foreign state or any forces on its territory to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe or genocide of the local population.
    The use of Russian troops to protect the Russian population from neo-Nazi gangs who threatened the Crimeans with reprisals.
    1. Cyril Offline Cyril
      Cyril (Kirill) 23 March 2021 14: 44
      0
      Again. The last one. This was not an occupation.
      The maximum that is suitable here is:
      Humanitarian intervention or humanitarian war - the use of military force against a foreign state or any forces on its territory to prevent a humanitarian catastrophe or genocide of the local population.

      The term "humanitarian intervention" describes the purpose and objectives of an action, while "occupation" describes the nature of the action. Humanitarian intervention may well be an occupation.
  15. Marzhecki Offline Marzhecki
    Marzhecki (Sergei) 21 March 2021 08: 38
    +1
    Quote: aquarius580
    Ukraine is not at war with Donbass. Ukraine is fighting a foreign army and its local collaborators.
    On March 1, 2014, the state flags of Ukraine were stripped from the building of the city administration of Donetsk and replaced by Russian ones. There was not a single Ukrainian serviceman and not a single volunteer. There was still a month and a half left before the order to start the ATO.

    Please tell me, do you take into account the opinion of the residents of Donbass, who at the referendum spoke in favor of independence from Ukraine? Was it the foreign army that voted instead of them and pulled down the Ukrainian flags, or were the locals themselves?
    All the same, against whom you are fighting, decide already.
    1. aquarius580 Offline aquarius580
      aquarius580 17 May 2021 03: 38
      0
      Why didn't you take into account the opinion of the inhabitants of Chechnya? Instead of recognizing "Ichkeria", they subjected it to carpet bombing.
      If the inhabitants of Tuva tore down the Russian flags and hang out the flags of Mongolia, how would you react to this? After all, Tuvans are ethnic Mongols. Oh yes, undermining the territorial integrity of the Russian Federation is a criminal offense. So in Ukraine it is also a crime: Article 110 of the Criminal Code.
  16. Eduard Aplombov Offline Eduard Aplombov
    Eduard Aplombov (Eduard Aplombov) 22 March 2021 09: 48
    -2
    pouring from empty to empty
    all normal people understand the reasons for the annexation of Crimea and the very meaning of the referendum
    enemies will chant their mantra and impose their ideas
    no one will come to a consensus, only shit and hatred
    that is, there is no point in writing about this topic for no reason
    listen to Jews and mankurt? yes burn they are all in hell
  17. Vladimir Alekseevich (Vladimir) 23 March 2021 10: 32
    -1
    A fairly well-known poet wrote an epigram back in the XNUMXth century:

    Shame on the liar
    Joking at the fool
    And to argue with a woman -
    All the same,
    What to draw water with a sieve.
    Deliver us from these three, God!

    In my opinion, the real Ukrainian government personifies all three characters in the epigram :) But, I think, not only Ukrainian :)
  18. Tungsten Molybdenum (Tungsten Molybdenum) April 10 2021 19: 43
    +1
    If Russia is at war with usrah, then how does it then trade diesel fuel, gasoline, liquefied gas, coke, electricity in transit through the ukroporty with it, if we stop all this, then how long it will last, given that the scandal with motor sich China will limit the purchases of ukrostov
  19. Vanya Pupkin Offline Vanya Pupkin
    Vanya Pupkin (vanya pupkin) April 13 2021 16: 52
    0
    I don’t understand something here that the Ukrainian domain? like RU! Where are you from here?