Back to the office… #emergeamericas (em Brickell Key Island)
Just landed back in Miami, and I already thinking about my next trip. Au revoir Paris.
YSL showroom was next level. #paris #fashionweek #followthebuyers (em Grand Palais)
Last day in Paris. #coffeebreak (em Hôtel Costes)
#KennyScharf in Paris. #wynwoodwalls #collette #paris. (em Colette)
BEIJING — China announced on Wednesday that it would increase its military budget for 2014 to almost $132 billion, a 12.2 percent rise over last year. The rapid growth in defense spending is another sign of the country’s goal of becoming a dominant military presence in the Pacific, with a navy able to project power across the region.
So, what is happening on the ground was clear: The Russians are taking over Crimea, although for now they have done so peacefully. The only shots reported so far have been Kalashnikov bursts in the air, fired by the soldiers surrounding Belbek as a warning to an approaching group of unarmed Ukrainians.
But legally? Were the Russian troops in Simferopol acting outside of international law by not wearing insignia that identified their nation — especially as the Kremlin reiterated over the weekend that it had not moved into Crimea? Was Ukraine’s president Oleksandr Turchynov justified in calling the men in Simferopol “terrorists with automatic weapons, judged by our special services to be professional soldiers?”
Whatever one’s position on Russian president Vladimir Putin’s gambit in Crimea, one thing is clear: Using unmarked troops to conduct military operations is not, per se, illegal.
But if Russia went into Crimea with the intention of showing force, would it not have made more sense to actually show its colors, rather than hide them? Not necessarily, Solis said, referring to an editorial by former U.S. national security adviser Zbigniew Brzezinski, who wrote Tuesday in the Washington Post that “Putin went in masked like a Mafia gangster.” The reason was that “in the event of serious Ukrainian resistance, he could disown the initiative and pull back,” wrote Brzezinski.
The point of the Geneva Conventions in this case is to enforce the principle of distinction between civilians and military combatants, so that civilians are not targeted. Article 48 of the Additional Protocol I to the Conventions states that “in order to ensure respect for and protection of the civilian population and civilian objects, the Parties to the conflict shall at all times distinguish between the civilian population and combatants and between civilian objects and military objectives and accordingly shall direct their operations only against military objectives.”
In other words, if someone is obviously an armed soldier in a conflict, international law treats him or her as such. “There is not an obligation in international humanitarian law to wear” uniforms, wrote Toni Pfanner, editor in chief of the International Review of the Red Cross, in a 2004 paper entitled Military Uniforms and the Law of War. The troops in Simferopol may not have been obviously identifiable as Russian, but they were clearly armed personnel in military garb, and as such, they were not violating the obligation that they should not be confused with civilians.
#Myview for sunset. Paris, you are beautiful. Miami ✈️ NYC ✈️ Moscow ✈️ Paris #worthit
When I first landed in Paris. #niggasinparis #parisianthugs #patternsinparis (em Aéroport Paris-Charles de Gaulle (CDG))
Sheremetyevo International Airport, Moscow, Русская. Now I know how #EdwardSnowden felt. (em Международный аэропорт Шереметьево / Sheremetyevo International Airport (SVO))
#Myview for sunrise, descending on #Moscow. ✈️🌅✈️
And I’m out! See y’all on the other side. #europe #moscow
//You know what this means…