I posted this because of the cyber/Tech angle in some tweets:
> Ukraine’s vice PM & minister for digital transformation says an “IT army” formed & now it’s recruiting IT specialists from other countries. ‘We translated tasks in English. Task # 1: use any vectors of cyber and DDoS attacks on sites and systems of Russian govt, biz, banks.’ -- https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1497813622793379842
> Zelensky announced the formation of a new unit - the International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine. It will be made up of foreigners who want to take part in repelling Russian aggression. -- https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1497826690822594562
While I can't picture myself taking up (cyber) arms against a foreign nation, aren't EU / US law quite explicit about the legality of meddling as a civilian? Or does it mean registering with the UA office will make it legal?. There are plenty on the fringes in the West who don't have a job or are totally disillusioned by their prospects for a good future.
The idea that attacking Russian assets (banks, companies) from your home in say UK, France or US and with impunity could be tempting. I think calling for a "foreign cyber army" may set a dangerous precedent to vigilante hacktivism and lead to escalation. It could also get messy if not coordinated with ongoing activities. No idea how the law works in this case? Even if I would lot of the cyber is uncharted territory.
I do hope it works out for them and they can recruit some top cyber brass this way.
Not directly related to the call for an international IT army, but one thing I can’t wrap my head around with Ukraine’s call for hackers is how can they coordinate anything? Presumably Russian state aligned hackers are out there, pretending to be white hats available to help, “oh yea, let us help setup your firewall.”
What’s the game plan? To clarify, not saying it’s a bad idea, just that I don’t understand how it is supposed to work
These kinds of laws are applied selectively in terms of attention, populism, etc..
My bet, is that if nobody is really aware that you're messing with the Russian Postal Service during 'this time' there isn't really going to be a concern.
The UK Government, I believe, just this morning indicated that they would support people who wanted to go and fight.
People have fought with the Kurds from various countries, though their actions were on foreign soil.
My hunch is that this is political. If you're doing it for ISIS, and authorities become aware, you're somehow going to be in trouble. They will find a law that you are breaking.
If you are fighting against Russian in a moment of crisis, and not completely publicly flaunting some very obvious law, then maybe the authorities won't care.
In the US however, it's tricky, because if someone, somewhere doesn't like what you're up to, they can put the DA on someone and find a way to book them for '100 years in jail' (i.e. Aaron Swartz).
>While I can't picture myself taking up (cyber) arms against a foreign nation, aren't EU / US law quite explicit about the legality of meddling as a civilian?
To actually take a shot at your question, for the US at least in general it appears to be perfectly legal purely as a matter of current US law for a private citizen to go and fight for another country, so long as it's not against the US. I could have sworn this had come up fairly recently in the midst of all the middle east battles and indeed Foreign Policy had a whole article devoted to it in 2011: "Is It Legal for Americans to Fight in Another Country’s Army?" [0]. Caveats don't seem to apply here, obviously the UA is not an American "designated terrorist organization", Russia is not an ally (to put it mildly), etc. So just in terms of "could an American go volunteer for this?" answer seems to be yes.
Of course in practice it's a lot more complicated. Being legal to go fight in another army has nothing to do with actually getting there, what you can bring, and coverage for your actions. Unless you have a direct private US<>Ukraine flight or boat, have to check on transit laws for all the countries one is going through. Laws about transport of weapons or equipment (ITAR) still apply, though things you bring purely for your own use may be allowed but it's not clear at a glance. Bringing extras would definitely require licensing. Regulations for commercial air/sea travel, customs and so on still apply. If an officially sanctioned uniformed part of the UA volunteers should be protected by the GC and POW treaties and so on same as any other soldier, but of course Russia's adherence to that isn't a given, and they won't actually have the US military backing them directly like a US soldier would. Any crimes committed could be prosecuted, and there are requirements for GC coverage (like being in uniform, chain of command) that over enthusiastic volunteers might ignore at their peril. Russia could well be expected to flat out invent supposed crimes they "saw" volunteers committing and that wouldn't be trivial to avoid if captured. And much more.
It's a heroic cause and if somebody or some group was serious about navigating all that and accepting the risk even beyond that to their lives I'd honor them for it, and if all went well and they made it home there doesn't appear to be any legal risk back here so there is that. But it'd be an even more serious business than going to fight as part of the regular US forces.
This statement is so counter to what I'd normally expect a defence minister to say that I wonder if it's being setup as a cover for British troops to be in Ukraine without bringing forth all the issues around Brits and Russians killing each other.
I wouldn't be surprised if special operations groups were already in country but this would let them be a lot more liberal with showing themselves.
This is such an awful idea. The origins of this war, and the annexation of Crimea following Euromaidan, lie in the Russian perception that Ukraine's status as a neutral buffer against NATO will change. Any European involvement of this kind would only serve to pour fuel onto this fire. I know this is not an official endorsement, however this is a patently irresponsible thing for a British politician to say.
I'm so happy we have all decided to put our capes on the moment a white majority nation is invaded despite the huge potential price to pay for it while we left people in the middle east get terrorised.
This is it. Ironic considering that EU/US is unwilling to fight a war that will benefit them the most. Ukraine is fighting this war for their country but they are also fighting to save the world from a very possible WWIII.
Which group are they fighting for? It's a former Soviet state fighting Russia. Part of being an independent nation means being diplomatic and not pissing off your neighbor. The CSA attacked a US fort and now they don't exist either. That's just the way it goes.
If by "our" you mean free democracy, eh, Ukraine wasn't exactly the bastion of free democracy you think it is. There were plenty of coups and illegitimate governments in its short life. There's nuance here but a lot of people are ignoring it and just eating up propaganda.
Decades of conditioning on moral superiority, and dehumanizing the "enemy" and people are ready to jump on command. Yes they have gone insane, but then again there have been plenty of people here constantly defending using nuclear bombs as a device of peace.
Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens.
Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). This applies to French foreing legions too. People with dual citizenship are treated specially, each state has their own rules for that situation (sometimes approval of the other state is needed, sometimes not). Dual nationality without dual citizenship means nothing.
> Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so).
What? This is nonsense. At least in Ireland, prosecutors have plenty of discretion not to push a case "because it is not in the public interest". And I'm quite sure other European countries don't all prosecute every alleged crime equally.
> There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here.
This is flat out wrong.
> Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens.
We've got a law like that in my country too, and there's no exception for dual citizens. Except it's only ever been enforced in two cases where some individuals went to fight for ISIS. They don't care one bit if you're in the armed forces of a friendly nation.
> Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so).
There is no single EU criminal law, each state has its own laws on both substantive criminal law and criminal procedure. What you’ve just said is a sweeping generalisation which might have some truth for some countries (it is true in principle for German law, although even German law has room for exceptions), but it is false for others (for example, Irish law is based on the English common law tradition, and so has prosecutorial discretion much as the England or the US do.)
In case this is not obvious to anyone reading, this is a terrible, terrible idea. Discounting the obvious risks of being killed, or injured, if you are captured as a member of a foreign paramilitary unit, you will not be afforded the same legal protections as a prisoner of war. Even after this war ends you may still find yourself imprisoned. You risk being tried as a war criminal, or even just a regular criminal being charged with murder, or another offense against the state.
This has been done before by Bosnia during their conflict with Serbia. They made a call to Mujahideen of the world to defend them. The prize for participation was a Bosnian passport. Hindsight may be 20/20, however I do not see any possible scenario where Ukraine joins the EU after the dust settles. Even if Ukraine grants you a passport, it won't be worth much. Especially if Russia considers you a war criminal for your efforts.
I think more details would be helpful. There isn't enough in the announcement to hold a meaningful conversation.
There is a tiny number of people who can drop everything and hop on an plane to Ukraine to fight. There is a much larger number of people who can do so if it still allows them to, for example:
- pay their rent/mortgage back home; or
- to gain citizenship so they can stay in Ukraine once the fighting stops
On the other hand, I do think there is some number of millionaires / billionaires who would be willing to sponsor people too.
There is very little mention of the Russian perspective in Western sources. That, and the fact that all the major Western news sources show heartbreaking photographs of children, lead me to believe that an agenda is being pushed.
[+] [-] DyslexicAtheist|4 years ago|reply
> Ukraine’s vice PM & minister for digital transformation says an “IT army” formed & now it’s recruiting IT specialists from other countries. ‘We translated tasks in English. Task # 1: use any vectors of cyber and DDoS attacks on sites and systems of Russian govt, biz, banks.’ -- https://twitter.com/ChristopherJM/status/1497813622793379842
> Zelensky announced the formation of a new unit - the International Legion of Territorial Defense of Ukraine. It will be made up of foreigners who want to take part in repelling Russian aggression. -- https://twitter.com/ragipsoylu/status/1497826690822594562
While I can't picture myself taking up (cyber) arms against a foreign nation, aren't EU / US law quite explicit about the legality of meddling as a civilian? Or does it mean registering with the UA office will make it legal?. There are plenty on the fringes in the West who don't have a job or are totally disillusioned by their prospects for a good future.
The idea that attacking Russian assets (banks, companies) from your home in say UK, France or US and with impunity could be tempting. I think calling for a "foreign cyber army" may set a dangerous precedent to vigilante hacktivism and lead to escalation. It could also get messy if not coordinated with ongoing activities. No idea how the law works in this case? Even if I would lot of the cyber is uncharted territory.
I do hope it works out for them and they can recruit some top cyber brass this way.
[+] [-] jaredklewis|4 years ago|reply
What’s the game plan? To clarify, not saying it’s a bad idea, just that I don’t understand how it is supposed to work
[+] [-] jollybean|4 years ago|reply
My bet, is that if nobody is really aware that you're messing with the Russian Postal Service during 'this time' there isn't really going to be a concern.
The UK Government, I believe, just this morning indicated that they would support people who wanted to go and fight.
People have fought with the Kurds from various countries, though their actions were on foreign soil.
My hunch is that this is political. If you're doing it for ISIS, and authorities become aware, you're somehow going to be in trouble. They will find a law that you are breaking.
If you are fighting against Russian in a moment of crisis, and not completely publicly flaunting some very obvious law, then maybe the authorities won't care.
In the US however, it's tricky, because if someone, somewhere doesn't like what you're up to, they can put the DA on someone and find a way to book them for '100 years in jail' (i.e. Aaron Swartz).
[+] [-] dgellow|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] belter|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xoa|4 years ago|reply
To actually take a shot at your question, for the US at least in general it appears to be perfectly legal purely as a matter of current US law for a private citizen to go and fight for another country, so long as it's not against the US. I could have sworn this had come up fairly recently in the midst of all the middle east battles and indeed Foreign Policy had a whole article devoted to it in 2011: "Is It Legal for Americans to Fight in Another Country’s Army?" [0]. Caveats don't seem to apply here, obviously the UA is not an American "designated terrorist organization", Russia is not an ally (to put it mildly), etc. So just in terms of "could an American go volunteer for this?" answer seems to be yes.
Of course in practice it's a lot more complicated. Being legal to go fight in another army has nothing to do with actually getting there, what you can bring, and coverage for your actions. Unless you have a direct private US<>Ukraine flight or boat, have to check on transit laws for all the countries one is going through. Laws about transport of weapons or equipment (ITAR) still apply, though things you bring purely for your own use may be allowed but it's not clear at a glance. Bringing extras would definitely require licensing. Regulations for commercial air/sea travel, customs and so on still apply. If an officially sanctioned uniformed part of the UA volunteers should be protected by the GC and POW treaties and so on same as any other soldier, but of course Russia's adherence to that isn't a given, and they won't actually have the US military backing them directly like a US soldier would. Any crimes committed could be prosecuted, and there are requirements for GC coverage (like being in uniform, chain of command) that over enthusiastic volunteers might ignore at their peril. Russia could well be expected to flat out invent supposed crimes they "saw" volunteers committing and that wouldn't be trivial to avoid if captured. And much more.
It's a heroic cause and if somebody or some group was serious about navigating all that and accepting the risk even beyond that to their lives I'd honor them for it, and if all went well and they made it home there doesn't appear to be any legal risk back here so there is that. But it'd be an even more serious business than going to fight as part of the regular US forces.
----
0: https://foreignpolicy.com/2011/09/02/is-it-legal-for-america...
[+] [-] cyberlurker|4 years ago|reply
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/ukraine-russi...
[+] [-] robkop|4 years ago|reply
I wouldn't be surprised if special operations groups were already in country but this would let them be a lot more liberal with showing themselves.
[+] [-] ogogmad|4 years ago|reply
Russia-UK relations are extremely bad right now.
[+] [-] livinginfear|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwawaybutwhy|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] throwaway45345|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] otar|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lvl100|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pinephoneguy|4 years ago|reply
Which group are they fighting for? It's a former Soviet state fighting Russia. Part of being an independent nation means being diplomatic and not pissing off your neighbor. The CSA attacked a US fort and now they don't exist either. That's just the way it goes.
If by "our" you mean free democracy, eh, Ukraine wasn't exactly the bastion of free democracy you think it is. There were plenty of coups and illegitimate governments in its short life. There's nuance here but a lot of people are ignoring it and just eating up propaganda.
[+] [-] eloisius|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] musha68k|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] rjzzleep|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] emteycz|4 years ago|reply
Edit: There is no such thing as "willingness to prosecute" in EU, all crimes must and will be prosecuted here (the officials of many states even said so). This applies to French foreing legions too. People with dual citizenship are treated specially, each state has their own rules for that situation (sometimes approval of the other state is needed, sometimes not). Dual nationality without dual citizenship means nothing.
[+] [-] mikeodds|4 years ago|reply
UK has stated you won’t be prosecuted https://www.bbc.com/news/live/world-europe-60542877?ns_mchan...
Edit: as pointed out below, has stated they will “support” citizens taking up the fight, not explicitly that they will not be prosecuted.
[+] [-] dmurray|4 years ago|reply
What? This is nonsense. At least in Ireland, prosecutors have plenty of discretion not to push a case "because it is not in the public interest". And I'm quite sure other European countries don't all prosecute every alleged crime equally.
[+] [-] sgjohnson|4 years ago|reply
This is flat out wrong.
> Beware, it's criminal to fight in a foreign army for most EU citizens.
We've got a law like that in my country too, and there's no exception for dual citizens. Except it's only ever been enforced in two cases where some individuals went to fight for ISIS. They don't care one bit if you're in the armed forces of a friendly nation.
[+] [-] actuator|4 years ago|reply
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/feb/27/liz-truss-says...
[+] [-] gameswithgo|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] skissane|4 years ago|reply
There is no single EU criminal law, each state has its own laws on both substantive criminal law and criminal procedure. What you’ve just said is a sweeping generalisation which might have some truth for some countries (it is true in principle for German law, although even German law has room for exceptions), but it is false for others (for example, Irish law is based on the English common law tradition, and so has prosecutorial discretion much as the England or the US do.)
[+] [-] refurb|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tgflynn|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] livinginfear|4 years ago|reply
This has been done before by Bosnia during their conflict with Serbia. They made a call to Mujahideen of the world to defend them. The prize for participation was a Bosnian passport. Hindsight may be 20/20, however I do not see any possible scenario where Ukraine joins the EU after the dust settles. Even if Ukraine grants you a passport, it won't be worth much. Especially if Russia considers you a war criminal for your efforts.
[+] [-] blagie|4 years ago|reply
There is a tiny number of people who can drop everything and hop on an plane to Ukraine to fight. There is a much larger number of people who can do so if it still allows them to, for example:
- pay their rent/mortgage back home; or
- to gain citizenship so they can stay in Ukraine once the fighting stops
On the other hand, I do think there is some number of millionaires / billionaires who would be willing to sponsor people too.
[+] [-] gbronner|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] simonsg|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bingohbangoh|4 years ago|reply
It's not like there isn't precedence in our time for this either. [0]
[0]: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3OWErhVyU0Y
[+] [-] ospzfmbbzr|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dotancohen|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] alkonaut|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ospzfmbbzr|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] fuoqi|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] artem247|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]