From what I understand, the Ukrainian constitution does not allow (national) elections under martial law. It also doesn’t allow amending the constitution under martial law either IIRC, so basically Zelenskyy is president until martial law ends.
Given that it’s allowed by their constitution, you can’t really say it’s illegitimate. You may not like it, but it’s perfectly in line with Ukraine’s laws.
Also, if there’s ever a time to declare martial law, it’s when your country is actively being invaded.
Pretty sure the point is they had to change them to be allowed to continue ruling, whereas Zelenksyy just used the existing laws and constitution as-is.
The Chinese constitution for example was change by Deng Xiaoping, guy right before Xi and then changed back by Xi. Not much of a ‘constitution’.
The point is that you’re taking an arbitrary condition which applies to Russia and China and doesn’t apply to Ukraine. But similar arguments of Zelensky staying in power usin martial law can be made. Zelensky is extremely unpopular in Ukraine currently and would almost certainly lose elections if they were held.
Where did Putin say “We’re gonna take the oil! We’re gonna grab it and take it!”?
Where does Trump claim that Venezuela is part the US, that it’s like an independent Texas overrun with Chinese puppet president suppressing the areas of Texas left where people still want to be part of the US and that is worried on whether nukes will be placed in those areas?
Guess Zelensky isn’t a legitimate president either, now Russia gets to invade Ukraine!
No, legitimacy depends on how much you kowtow towards the US.
Removed by mod
What do you mean? Zelensky’s term has long ended.
From what I understand, the Ukrainian constitution does not allow (national) elections under martial law. It also doesn’t allow amending the constitution under martial law either IIRC, so basically Zelenskyy is president until martial law ends.
The martial law which he himself declares.
Same schtick different justification.
Given that it’s allowed by their constitution, you can’t really say it’s illegitimate. You may not like it, but it’s perfectly in line with Ukraine’s laws.
Also, if there’s ever a time to declare martial law, it’s when your country is actively being invaded.
Okay cool so Putin and Xi are also legitimate because they were clearly allowed to changed their own laws.
Pretty sure the point is they had to change them to be allowed to continue ruling, whereas Zelenksyy just used the existing laws and constitution as-is.
The Chinese constitution for example was change by Deng Xiaoping, guy right before Xi and then changed back by Xi. Not much of a ‘constitution’.
The point is that you’re taking an arbitrary condition which applies to Russia and China and doesn’t apply to Ukraine. But similar arguments of Zelensky staying in power usin martial law can be made. Zelensky is extremely unpopular in Ukraine currently and would almost certainly lose elections if they were held.
I’m ashamed to admit that it took me this long down the thread, to realize that this is a lemmy.ml community.
That’s literally the claim they’d been making since 2014.
US is playing by the Russian playbook right now. And EU decided to play along.
Where did Putin say “We’re gonna take the oil! We’re gonna grab it and take it!”?
Where does Trump claim that Venezuela is part the US, that it’s like an independent Texas overrun with Chinese puppet president suppressing the areas of Texas left where people still want to be part of the US and that is worried on whether nukes will be placed in those areas?
Russia did invade and has tried to multiple times to assasinate him
How is Zelensky not a legitimate head of state? He won his election without rigging.
He isn’t since April 2024 and is using martial law to keep himself in power despite not being able to sue for peace
Nuland did the rigging