I listened to an interview recently, I believe on BBC, where the interviewee said the biggest issue with peace talks is that the international community isn't able to trust Putin to keep his word on whatever is agreed upon. I hadn't considered that, but it makes a lot of sense and I'm not sure how that could change
this post was submitted on 08 Sep 2024
118 points (96.8% liked)
World News
32079 readers
863 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
But Putin was they only party to the previous Minsk agreements who kept his word. Merkel and then Hollande admitted that they never had any intention of honoring the agreements.
The international community being G7 countries accounting for 15% of world population. Nobody gives a fuck what the west thinks at this point.
Russia won't be trustworthy until Putin and his fascist United Russia party are gone.
Who was the interviewee?
load more comments
(10 replies)
Step up military aid to Ukraine significantly. That is the only way to peace. Giving in to russian demands would only lead to a short cease fire, before they launch their next attack.
That so many Germans have bought into russian propaganda is a major hurdle.
real easy to say for someone not in a warzone
Tell us all about it then, colonel
load more comments
(6 replies)
Why do you think there would be a "next attack" and where?
peace is when more war harder
the more war harder you war, the less putin you propaganda
I was wondering why this had so many downvotes until I noticed the instance this is on.
It's more positive than I expected. 😁
The primary problem is that for negotiations to even begin is that Ukraine itself has a law that forbids anybody to negotiate with Putin before Ukraine has regained all it's lands, even Zelensky himself would technically speaking commit treason by agreeing to talk on peace terms before this law is repealed. That is unless Scholz speaks of the "Zelensky peace plan" that is basically Russia gives up all the pre 2014 territories and then Kiev will negotiate with Moscow. Which is equally nonsensical and impossible situation.
I don't know if what if any Scholz is trying to do here. All talk most likely for domestic audience, because the opposition won big in regional elections in Germany lately on "no more money to Ukraine" platform.
Ukraine's government can change that law if they want to, of course. And if things keep going as they have been, they will have to choose between doing that and losing even more territory.
Attempts at maximum escalation have not produced good results for the Ukrainian people. I would like fewer of them to die given the realistic options available.
Re: Scholz I think the higher-ups in Western Europe are aware that their "support for Ukraine" is more about trying to hurt Russia than help the Ukrainian people. I would expect more to jump ship as the possibility of anything other than a full rout starts to vanish. These countries aren't going to actually sacrifice anything they value in order to actually help common Ukrainian people. At the moment their "aid" is mostly weapons and ammunition whose main purpose is to prop up military contractors.
Or NATO just allows them to destroy airfields Russia is launching rockets from.
So our choice is to give the purse to the thief that wants more land in the future, or slap the knife out of his hand
Russia has far more military capacity than Ukraine. Every escalation runs the risk of Russia adopting NATO's scorched earth tactics. Russia clearly sees value in the slow grind approach, which they explain as a de facto demilitarization of Ukraine, but if they ever stop seeing value in that...
Don't forget what NATO member countries do to their military targets and what the outcomes are. Every population center in North Korea bombed out. Agent orange, napalm, mass bombing campaigns in Laos and Vietnam. Reckless and depraved mass killings in Algeria. Two invasions of Iraq and interceding sanctions that killed millions of children, with a heavy focus on the destruction of civilian infrastructure.
Hoping for escalation can only mean hoping fot mass death for Ukrainians. This is not a movie or an idle fantasy where we get to play pretend about knocking a knife out if the bad guys hands. This is the real world with actual troop deployments and bombing campaigns and industrial bases and drones that pick people off while they sleep and a country that still functions but can be made to not with about a week of bombings.
load more comments
(6 replies)
Endless escalation is impossible. Russia has nukes.
Even assuming Ukraine starts winning the conventional war against all odds, If the situation ever looks too dire Ukraine does not have the required MAD deterrence to prevent Russia from nuking them.
load more comments
(3 replies)
I believe it must be seen as a meagre attempt to appeal to the rising numbers of supporters of the AfD and BSW. Both political parties have won significant ground in the latest state elections and both can be considered Putin-friendly, to say the least.
In the past, Schulz has followed closely the position and decisions of the USA and I cannot see this changing in the foreseeable future.
Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections, but they cannot bend it to hold peace talks? It's just an excuse.
Essentially yes because both holding elections or negotiating would spell doom to many Kiev politicians and very likely not just their political careers.
Quite the irony; somehow not doing anything and getting people killed needlessly and destroying your own nation is an okay path forward, but trying to find a compromise that stops that would cost you your career... I mean, it's not surprising, but also really sad.
Sooo they can bend the law and postpone holding elections
No, Ukraine was attacked, so parliament and president declared martial law. Ukraine is constitutionally prohibited from holding elections until it is over.
I am the most inexpert of laypeople on this subject, but I've wondered whether the incursion into Russian territory has been to give Ukraine a better position to negotiate on a mutual return of territory in talks, if they come about.
We have to speculate about it, but it is a reckless maneuver that has led to the nee, rapid losses on the main front. I would expect that it is reckless ideologues trying to push it.
Ukraine has seen some high-profile resignations just before and during this, so it is possible that the early resignations was people opposed to invading a sliver of Kursk and the later ones might be people that wanted to invade.
But this is just guessing.
It's incredibly funny that the level from which we'd be 'stepping up' is holding a 70 nation conference for peace that the country winning the war was not invited to
load more comments
(4 replies)
lmao even Scholz is starting to realize Ukraine lost the war
There’s an easy answer to bring peace to Ukraine. The Russians can pack up all their shit and just go home.
How do you expect that to happen?
- A palace coup by the oligarchs
- A civil war in Russia
- China and India stop trading with Russia
- Russia runs out of tanks
- Russia runs out of money
Take your pick.
A palace coup by the oligarchs
"The oligarchs" are just the ultra-rich owners of companies. Like US billionaires or the South Korean Chaebol owners. This war was launched and us maintained with their consent and support. They are the head of the capitalist ruling class in the RF. If they changed their minds Putin would just appear to have decided this himself.
So far, the Russian economy has actually improved during the war and profits are high.
A civil war in Russia
Why would this be a plausible thing to happen in the next few years?
China and India stop trading with Russia
And shoot themselves in the foot? Why? US-led sanctions and financial weapons deployed against Russia have already scared countries into working together to avoid being vulnerable to the US.
Russia runs out of tanks
Russia has increased its industrial capacity during this war. The opposite is more likely: the US and Western Europe have been sending old stocks but they are failing to replace them fast enough, particularly artillery.
Russia runs out of money
But Russia is actually doing better than before. They have been forced to invest in the real economy and consequently have, against the plans of their finance capitalist economists, made their economy much more robust.
These aren't realistic outcomes. And the problem with rose-tinted glasses here is that it means a lot of Ukrainians die for no reason.
load more comments
(6 replies)
view more: next ›