DEO JUVANTE And so help me God!
Monday 24 May 2010
George Osborne should have thought more carefully before crossing the business secretary
24 Oct 2008 — UK
On October 21st Nathaniel Rothschild, a financier at whose villa George Osborne stayed in Corfu, alleged in a letter to the Times that Mr Osborne and Andrew Feldman, the Conservative Party’s chief executive, had solicited a donation from Mr Oleg Deripaska. He accused them of discussing routing money via a British company to make it legal under party-funding laws. Mr Osborne maintains that the idea had been Mr Rothschild’s, implicitly conceding that they had talked about such a donation.
These events are important because of the willingness of politicians to collude with rich Russians who seek to launder their reputations, the risk to the conservatives in appearing to be well off and leisurely as recession bites.
Source: The Economist
Sunday 23 May 2010
Sunday 16 May 2010
UKRAINIAN MONARCHY?
Ukrainian Monarchy: Illusion or Prospects?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By Yury TOPCHIY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
KING WANTED: GOOD PAY, NO RESPONSIBILITIES
European history at the turn of the twenty-first century teems with curious amusing incidents. A decade ago, no one could have dreamed of a true monarch coming to power in Bulgaria. The restoration of monarchy is actively discussed in Italy.
Could the monarchical idea be reincarnated in Ukraine? Some will laugh at this, others will shrug it off, yet there are people treating this issue very seriously, among them Yury Topchiy, Chairman of the Throne All-Ukrainian Public Organization, better known as Gustav Vodicka, author of the controversial book The Dormant Angels’ Family.
On October 16, 1918, Charles I of Austria-Hungary announced his intention to form an alliance of four monarchies — Austro-Hungarian, Bohemian, South Slavic, and Ukrainian. Unfortunately, the Ukrainians failed to come to terms among themselves and missed the opportunity. Ukraine subsequently lost all the attributes of statehood. Was this a consequence of discarding the then traditional European monarchic system and adopting a republican one?
The Ukrainians have never had a national idea. For a long time the void was filled with the concept of independence. It was only natural, for without establishing a nation-state it was impossible to conceive the national idea. Now that Ukraine finally got its independence, the Ukrainians can determine the sense of their existence. In the romantic sense, the national idea is a cherished dream for the sake of which one can proudly sacrifice his life. In other words, the national idea cannot form with regard to a pragmatic objective, only if a given nation sets an elevated goal.
Ukraine is currently an ailing republic on an unpredictable political course. The absence of national unity, constant instability, and an overall crisis of relationships among people testify to the need for clearly defined cultural and spiritual guidelines of the Ukrainian community. This could be achieved by adopting a specific declaration changing the national political system.
A parliamentary-presidential republic has been actively propagated of late. The bill in question appears to differ little from the Spanish constitution with the king at the head of the political system and the domestic legal system consisting in democracy and universal suffrage. Note that the Spanish monarchy was restored in 1975, after fifty years. This changed Spain’s international status substantially, significantly enhancing its prestige and causing economic and cultural growth.
Proposals to change Ukraine’s political system could be described as preconditions for the establishment of a Ukrainian monarchy as a system best equipped to further the development of the Ukrainian nation. What use is an unstable republic with a figurehead for president to the Ukrainians? After all, the Constitution allows us to have a powerful and respectable state ruled by a capable monarch.
To achieve this, we need not exert Herculean efforts. Any European country wishing to replace its political system with a hereditary monarchy must abide by international legal instruments dating from the of 1814-15 congress of Vienna. Under international law, the sole legitimate claimant to the throne of a United and Independent Ukraine is the Habsburg dynasty represented by Otto von Habsburg, Titular King of Galicia [Halychyna] and Lodomeria (Volodymeria, meaning Volodymyr Volynssk), and his heirs. Only in this case would the Ukrainian Monarchy be unquestioningly recognized by the other monarchs of Europe.
We know from history that, prior to the 1917-18 revolution, territories of current independent Ukraine were part of two monarchies: Russia and Austria-Hungary. Those were the last legitimate monarchic precedents in Ukrainian history. It is only on this basis that a real claimant to the Ukrainian throne can be determined.
Nowadays, there are no legitimate claimants to the Russian throne, considering the former Russian Empire and its frontiers before February 1917, although there are quite a few Schleswig-Holstein-Gottorp-Romanov descendants. The thing is that, since Paul I, female succession to the throne was not legally prescribed. And nor was it possible to transfer the succession title thorough a female issue. Alexander III made the law even more rigid, banning succession by any descendants from morganatic marriages.
Russia’s last sovereign Nicholas II reaffirmed these provisos and they remained valid until his dethronement. In fact, they are still legally effective and no one can alter or annul them. Thus, under the law reaffirmed by the last [Russian] sovereign, all the existing Romanov descendants are denied the right to claim the throne of the former Russian empire ad infinitum. This is generally known. Therefore, the Kingdom of Galicia and Volodymyr and the Duchy of Bukovyna constitute the sole precedent of a legitimate monarchy in the territory of modern Ukraine, because they were part of the Austro-Hungarian Empire.
Maria Theresa von Habsburg [(1717-1780), archduchess of Austria and queen of Hungary and Bohemia (1740-1780)] signed a decree in 1772, establishing the Kingdom of Galicia and Volyn on the land of the former Poland, then part of the Holy Roman Empire. The new monarchy was conferred a coat of arms and a crown. In a way, it was a restoration of the Kingdom of Danylo of Halych who had, in his time, received certain rights in the Austrian Duchy through his son’s dynastic marriage. Thus emerged a new monarchic entity with its own elective legislature, the Landtag, and king as head of state. The title “King of Galicia and Volodymyr” (whichincluded neither Halych nor Volodymyr-Volynsk —Ed.) was then adopted by all Habsburg emperors. Later, the Habsburgs joined Bukovyna to their lands, granting it the status of a duchy. The said monarchic entities existed until 1918. Although long since factually nonexistent, their titular existence has not ceased de jure to this day.
If a monarchy is replaced by a republic, the latter cannot be regarded as a legal successor to the former, nor does this relieve the monarch of his duties and an opportunity to be reinstated. If a lawful monarch is forcefully dethroned, he can claim full restitution of property and nonproperty rights. Here it is important to note that the Habsburgs never abdicated their thrones in the Kingdom of Galicia and Volodymyr or at the Duchy of Bukovyna. If even a small part of a republic has a titular monarch, international law reads that the latter is the sole legitimate claimant to the throne of that country, if and when its political system is replaced by a hereditary monarchy.
Empires are known to have formed by the joining of separate titular territories under a single crown. And so the enthronement of a Habsburg heir would automatically transform Ukraine into an internationally acknowledged monarchy with an imperial status. Considering the Habsburg dynasty’s utmost moral prestige, a Ukrainian Empire would from the outset exert a tangible influence on the European community.
As a symbol of national unity, the Emperor of Ukraine would be a true guarantor of our independence, legality, democracy, stability, and prosperity. The consolidating strength of the throne would prevent political cataclysms, quell negative tensions, enhance national identity. God, the Emperor, and the Motherland, as three components of serving the noble cause, would instill new morals and lay the foundations of the Ukrainian national idea.
The Ukrainian monarchic prospects are gradually becoming realistic. In the spring of 2003, the popular monarchic movement of Ukraine, united within the Throne All-Ukrainian Public Organization, addressed a message to His Majesty Otto von Habsburg, recognizing him and his inheritors the sole and unquestionable claimants to the throne of a United and Independent Ukraine, and swearing allegiance to him. Otto von Habsburg replied in writing, expressing gratitude and profound affection and respect for the entire Ukrainian nation. Otto, son of the last Emperor of Austro-Hungary, creator of a single Europe, President of the Pan-European Union, the eldest honorary member of the European Parliament, favors the idea of a strong Ukrainian state built after the European standard.
Considering the age of the head of the imperial dynasty (he will be 91 in November), Ukraine can count on the enthronement of his eldest son Karl [Charles] von Habsburg. He was born in 1961 and is a retired war pilot with training in the humanities and an enviable political experience at international organizations. He is currently Director of the Unrepresented Peoples and Nations Organization at the European Union.
A very long time ago, 300 Spartans died to save Greece in the Battle of Thermopylae. Centuries later, 300 Ukrainian students died at Kruty, defending the Ukrainian Republic. No one would have to die for a Ukrainian Empire. It would only take 300 people’s deputies pressing the aye button and thus glorifying themselves and their nations, rising in defense of God, the Emperor, and Motherland.
#31, Tuesday, 21 October 2003
http://www.day.kiev.ua/261155/
FOOTBALL IN MONACO
(l to r) Marco Simone, Pierre Casiraghi (son of Princess Caroline), Daniel Ducruet (son of Princess Stephanie) and HSH Prince Albert II of Monaco pose with their trophy after a football match organized against the drivers of today's Forumla One drivers. The match was held at the Prince Louis II Stadium and benefited AMADE (World Association of Children's Friends) which is based in Monaco and under the patronage of Princess Caroline to help unfortunate children around the world.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)