Pompeo urged not to confuse Crimea with the Golan Heights
Policy The United States is completely different with respect to Crimea and the Golan Heights, as these two situations have nothing in common with each other. This statement was made by the head of the US Department of State Mike Pompeo during a hearing in the appropriation committee of the US Senate.
According to the Secretary of State, the difference is that Israel in 1967 was attacked by Syria and was forced to capture the Golan. In 2014, no one attacked Russia. Mike Pompeo believes that Moscow took the opportunity to annex part of the territory of Ukraine, which did not pose any threat to Russia.
The capture of the Golan Heights by Tel Aviv, according to the head of the State Department, was undertaken to protect his country from the attack of the "Syrian aggressors."
Comparing the Golan Heights and Crimea, Pompeo said:
After hearing the head of the State Department, Senator Dick Durbin asked him to clarify whether this means that the United States considers the occupation of territories acceptable during military operations. The Secretary of State responded in the affirmative, adding that he considered such actions to be “practical policy” measures. In his opinion, the seizure of part of the territory from the aggressor country could be a punishment for him.
According to the Secretary of State, the difference is that Israel in 1967 was attacked by Syria and was forced to capture the Golan. In 2014, no one attacked Russia. Mike Pompeo believes that Moscow took the opportunity to annex part of the territory of Ukraine, which did not pose any threat to Russia.
The capture of the Golan Heights by Tel Aviv, according to the head of the State Department, was undertaken to protect his country from the attack of the "Syrian aggressors."
Comparing the Golan Heights and Crimea, Pompeo said:
There are no more different situations than these.
After hearing the head of the State Department, Senator Dick Durbin asked him to clarify whether this means that the United States considers the occupation of territories acceptable during military operations. The Secretary of State responded in the affirmative, adding that he considered such actions to be “practical policy” measures. In his opinion, the seizure of part of the territory from the aggressor country could be a punishment for him.
Information