Putin gives terms for Ukraine ceasefire and peace talks
- Thread starter Hawkeye10
- Start date
Just what we need , another Putin ass kisser.
serendipity
Verified User
The trouble is nobody trusts Putin can you seriously blame them?
Demanding war then losing at war in humiliating fashion as America has done carries consequences.
LIAR.
Or I guess they could just fight to the last Ukrainian until they are fielding an army of 85 year olds and little kids if you want? Would that be a better fate for the people of Ukraine do you think? Sometimes even the most ferocious heavy weight boxer has to throw in the towel so he isnt beaten to death in the ring and lives to fight another day.
The Russians are proceeding as if they will soon be fighting NATO flagged forces in Ukraine. They have been worried about this all along, which is why they have now well over 300,000 very well trained and equipped troops in reserve. All of my grapevine is convinced that all of NATO has no ability to beat Russia in Ukraine, if they go in they will soon find out. Then we will be exactly where we are now...America and Europe will face the choice of admitting defeat or escalation...except that the escalation will be global nuclear WW3....there will be nowhere else to go on the escalatory ladder.
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
So, what's the alternative? Ukraine continues to fight a war that debilitates their country and that they cannot win? If there is a war between Russia and NATO, it will take years for NATO to win, simply because it will take years for NATO to build a military that can win. In the meantime, the whole of the West suffers the privations of war, and for what? To "save" Ukraine?
The only winner in that is China.
Russia and China are now blood brothers....the incompetents who run the West forced them into it......The West will not win in UKraine......ever.....they should have known this two years ago when they demanded this war but did not.....and they never wise up.
serendipity
Verified User
Russia 'will run out of troops' in Ukraine as soldiers warn they are 'getting massacred'
An expert says Russia can still throw over 6million men into the war but adds that Putin will soon run out of bodies.
Russia 'will run out of troops' in Ukraine as soldiers are 'massacred'
An expert says Russia can still throw over 6million men into the war but adds that Putin will soon run out of bodies.
www.express.co.uk
What is your point?Russia 'will run out of troops' in Ukraine as soldiers warn they are 'getting massacred'
An expert says Russia can still throw over 6million men into the war but adds that Putin will soon run out of bodies.
Russia 'will run out of troops' in Ukraine as soldiers are 'massacred'
An expert says Russia can still throw over 6million men into the war but adds that Putin will soon run out of bodies.
serendipity
Verified User
serendipity
Verified User
There is always some prick who pops up bullshitting about the Minsk Agreement. It makes you wonder if they actually have a fucking clue.
The Minsk Agreements were meant to ease conflict in the Donbas, only to be torn to shreds by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A diplomat involved in the Minsk process tells Jacobin why it failed, and what chance diplomacy has of de-escalating the war.
Ukrainian soldiers take part in a joint military training near the border with Belarus on February 11, 2023. (Dimitar Dilkoff / AFP via Getty Images)
INTERVIEW BY ALEXANDER BRENTLER
A year into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, there seems to be little hope of resolution any time soon. In the West, advocates of greater military support for Kyiv often argue that there can be no peace without Ukraine pushing Russia off the territory occupied since February 24, 2022 — or even Crimea, already taken over by Moscow in 2014. Critics, especially on the Left, point to the danger of an unending bloodbath or even escalation of the existing conflict. Yet calls for “diplomatic solutions” raise many questions, namely: What kind of settlement, or even ceasefire terms, would be even broadly tolerable to both sides, especially Ukrainians on the receiving end of the invasion?
Some insight can come from those with experience dealing with apparently intractable conflicts, and indeed the past attempts at a peace process in eastern Ukraine. One such figure is Wolfgang Sporrer, who teaches conflict management at the Hertie School of government in Berlin. He is former head of the Human Dimension Department of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Kyiv, where he led the civilian aspects of conflict management and facilitated and promoted dialogue between the opposing sides.
Sporrer was also involved in the diplomatic process surrounding the Minsk agreements of 2014–15. Mediated by France and Germany, the agreements were signed by the Russian and Ukrainian governments as well as the OSCE, for which Sporrer worked. Faced with the armed conflict in Donbas, eastern Ukraine, fought between Russian separatists and the Ukrainian armed forces, the agreements sought to provide for ceasefire conditions, albeit with limited success.
In an interview with Jacobin, Sporrer explains why diplomacy deserves another chance in Ukraine — but cautions against excessive optimism.
ALEXANDER BRENTLER
At the moment, there is no dialogue taking place between the highest levels of government in Kyiv and Moscow. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian president Vladimir Putin have ruled out speaking to each other directly. But negotiations are taking place, that much is obvious. Which diplomatic channels are open at the moment? And are the parties moving closer to dialogue?
WOLFGANG SPORRER
It’s important to remember that there are official talks taking place between the two sides. In Istanbul, there is a functioning, internationally mediated dialogue taking place, chaired by the UN, concerning the question of grain exports, and humanitarian NGOs are participating in it. This constitutes an official diplomatic channel. Both sides sit down in person, across from each other. Unfortunately, the remit of these talks is narrowly defined as only concerning the question of grain shipments. Further efforts are obviously necessary in order to improve the humanitarian situation and achieve a peace settlement.
Of course, unofficial talks are also taking place. Since there is an ongoing exchange of prisoners, someone obviously must be negotiating about it. And there surely are informal talks between both militaries — but also between the United States and Russia — taking place. But the so-called Istanbul initiative on grain shipments is currently the only form of official dialogue between Ukraine and Russia.
ALEXANDER BRENTLER
In your view, the war in Ukraine was not inevitable. In the run-up to the war, you were also skeptical that it would actually break out.
WOLFGANG SPORRER
Was this war inevitable? I don’t think so at all. There are no fundamental territorial or ethnic conflicts between Russia and Ukraine that are so significant that they would inevitably have led to war. This isn’t a fight over resources, either. That is why I have always considered this war to be avoidable and a negotiated solution to be achievable.
In simple terms, one can say that this war was preventable until the moment of the unilateral decision of the Kremlin, i.e. Putin and his inner circle, to actually wage this war.
ALEXANDER BRENTLER
What developments have brought us to this point? You were directly involved in the Minsk process. Why do you think it failed?
WOLFGANG SPORRER
There were three main reasons for the failure of the Minsk agreements. First, the Minsk agreements did not address the root cause of the conflict. It was stipulated, so to speak, that there was or had been some kind of ethnic conflict between Russians and Ukrainians in Ukraine, and that this was the reason for the outbreak of violence. And by settling this alleged ethnic conflict, the conflict could be pacified.
This was pure fiction. The ethnic conflicts that existed in Ukraine were no more serious than ethnic tensions in many other countries.
Moreover, the dividing lines in this conflict, if one insists on understanding them in ethnic terms, are incredibly blurred. This is not about the Russian versus the Ukrainian language or Ukrainian versus Russian national identity. Nor is it about religion, not even in the slightest. At most, one could find something like an eastern Ukrainian Donbas identity. But this regional identity of the Donbas is not much stronger than strong regional identities in other countries.
What this conflict is fundamentally about is Russia wanting to exert influence over the domestic and foreign policy orientation of the government in Kyiv. In the Minsk agreement, however, this fiction of an ethnic conflict was constructed instead, although Russia actually had no particular interest in obtaining any autonomy rights for eastern Ukraine, for Russian-speaking or ethnically Russian Ukrainian citizens.
jacobin.com
Diplomat: Why the Minsk Agreements Failed in Ukraine
AN INTERVIEW WITH WOLFGANG SPORRERThe Minsk Agreements were meant to ease conflict in the Donbas, only to be torn to shreds by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A diplomat involved in the Minsk process tells Jacobin why it failed, and what chance diplomacy has of de-escalating the war.
Ukrainian soldiers take part in a joint military training near the border with Belarus on February 11, 2023. (Dimitar Dilkoff / AFP via Getty Images)
INTERVIEW BY ALEXANDER BRENTLER
A year into Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, there seems to be little hope of resolution any time soon. In the West, advocates of greater military support for Kyiv often argue that there can be no peace without Ukraine pushing Russia off the territory occupied since February 24, 2022 — or even Crimea, already taken over by Moscow in 2014. Critics, especially on the Left, point to the danger of an unending bloodbath or even escalation of the existing conflict. Yet calls for “diplomatic solutions” raise many questions, namely: What kind of settlement, or even ceasefire terms, would be even broadly tolerable to both sides, especially Ukrainians on the receiving end of the invasion?
Some insight can come from those with experience dealing with apparently intractable conflicts, and indeed the past attempts at a peace process in eastern Ukraine. One such figure is Wolfgang Sporrer, who teaches conflict management at the Hertie School of government in Berlin. He is former head of the Human Dimension Department of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) in Kyiv, where he led the civilian aspects of conflict management and facilitated and promoted dialogue between the opposing sides.
Sporrer was also involved in the diplomatic process surrounding the Minsk agreements of 2014–15. Mediated by France and Germany, the agreements were signed by the Russian and Ukrainian governments as well as the OSCE, for which Sporrer worked. Faced with the armed conflict in Donbas, eastern Ukraine, fought between Russian separatists and the Ukrainian armed forces, the agreements sought to provide for ceasefire conditions, albeit with limited success.
In an interview with Jacobin, Sporrer explains why diplomacy deserves another chance in Ukraine — but cautions against excessive optimism.
ALEXANDER BRENTLER
At the moment, there is no dialogue taking place between the highest levels of government in Kyiv and Moscow. Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian president Vladimir Putin have ruled out speaking to each other directly. But negotiations are taking place, that much is obvious. Which diplomatic channels are open at the moment? And are the parties moving closer to dialogue?
WOLFGANG SPORRER
It’s important to remember that there are official talks taking place between the two sides. In Istanbul, there is a functioning, internationally mediated dialogue taking place, chaired by the UN, concerning the question of grain exports, and humanitarian NGOs are participating in it. This constitutes an official diplomatic channel. Both sides sit down in person, across from each other. Unfortunately, the remit of these talks is narrowly defined as only concerning the question of grain shipments. Further efforts are obviously necessary in order to improve the humanitarian situation and achieve a peace settlement.
Of course, unofficial talks are also taking place. Since there is an ongoing exchange of prisoners, someone obviously must be negotiating about it. And there surely are informal talks between both militaries — but also between the United States and Russia — taking place. But the so-called Istanbul initiative on grain shipments is currently the only form of official dialogue between Ukraine and Russia.
ALEXANDER BRENTLER
In your view, the war in Ukraine was not inevitable. In the run-up to the war, you were also skeptical that it would actually break out.
WOLFGANG SPORRER
Was this war inevitable? I don’t think so at all. There are no fundamental territorial or ethnic conflicts between Russia and Ukraine that are so significant that they would inevitably have led to war. This isn’t a fight over resources, either. That is why I have always considered this war to be avoidable and a negotiated solution to be achievable.
In simple terms, one can say that this war was preventable until the moment of the unilateral decision of the Kremlin, i.e. Putin and his inner circle, to actually wage this war.
ALEXANDER BRENTLER
What developments have brought us to this point? You were directly involved in the Minsk process. Why do you think it failed?
WOLFGANG SPORRER
There were three main reasons for the failure of the Minsk agreements. First, the Minsk agreements did not address the root cause of the conflict. It was stipulated, so to speak, that there was or had been some kind of ethnic conflict between Russians and Ukrainians in Ukraine, and that this was the reason for the outbreak of violence. And by settling this alleged ethnic conflict, the conflict could be pacified.
This was pure fiction. The ethnic conflicts that existed in Ukraine were no more serious than ethnic tensions in many other countries.
Moreover, the dividing lines in this conflict, if one insists on understanding them in ethnic terms, are incredibly blurred. This is not about the Russian versus the Ukrainian language or Ukrainian versus Russian national identity. Nor is it about religion, not even in the slightest. At most, one could find something like an eastern Ukrainian Donbas identity. But this regional identity of the Donbas is not much stronger than strong regional identities in other countries.
What this conflict is fundamentally about is Russia wanting to exert influence over the domestic and foreign policy orientation of the government in Kyiv. In the Minsk agreement, however, this fiction of an ethnic conflict was constructed instead, although Russia actually had no particular interest in obtaining any autonomy rights for eastern Ukraine, for Russian-speaking or ethnically Russian Ukrainian citizens.
Diplomat: Why the Minsk Agreements Failed in Ukraine
The Minsk Agreements were meant to ease conflict in the Donbas, only to be torn to shreds by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. A diplomat involved in the Minsk process tells Jacobin why it failed, and what chance diplomacy has of de-escalating the war.
jacobin.com
Last edited:
serendipity
Verified User
Putin doesn't want a ceasefire he wants total capitulation to save his sorry arse.