Far too many world leaders are wasting their time at G7 summits and useless peace conferences. All they really need is to get onto nostr and follow me. I'll lay out the peace deal that will end this war right now. Here it is: MIKE DILGER PEACE ACCORD FOR UKRAINE 1) Independence for the Donbass regions The People's Republic of Donetsk and the People's Republic of Luhansk to be recognized as independent nations, neither Ukraine nor Russia. These new nations (or single nation, at their behest) provide to their neighbors the following security guarantees a) They will never join any security alliance, neither NATO nor CSTO (but can join any economic union they desire) b) They will remain non-nuclear Russia and Ukraine pull out their military forces from these regions 2) Crimea goes to Russia Crimea is recognized as part of Russia, and Ukraine ceases hostilities with it. 3) Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions go to Ukraine These two regions are recognized as Ukraine, and Russia withdraws their forces. 4) Ukraine declares neutrality Ukraine provides a security guarantee that they will remain neutral, to not join eany security alliance, neither NATO nor CSTO. Ukraine can join any economic union they desire. Ukraine must remain non-nuclear. Ukraine is not required to demilitarize or denazify Ukraine must respect it's own constitution or else violates this peace accord
What does Ukrain get out of this? This is essentially all Russian demands except Odessa and the south
First, the actual battle lines currently are inside of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia. This deal backs those up meaning Russia concedes territory it already holds, and Ukraine concedes no territory at all. You might think Ukraine's pre-2022 borders are the 'proper' borders but Russia thinks Ukraine's pre-Soviet breakup are the 'proper' borders. Ukraine arguing from it's memory of "we used to hold this land" is just as illogical as Russia arguing from it's memory of "we used to hold this land". The only real objective truth is the current battle lines, and this agreement favors Ukraine decisively in that regard.
Within your logic, if Russia occupied Kiev, then it make sense for Kiev to go to Russia. Military occupation has nothing to do with the ability to rule the land. It's nonsense to think western Ukraine, even it occupied would be willing to submit to russian rule, given how "westernized" it is.
That is a reasonable basis for an argument, I don't disagree. Western Ukraine would not be "tamed" by Russia, and IMHO I don't think Russia would care to try. So if you want to argue that Donetsk and Luhansk are pro-West and hate Russia and are trying to push Russia out you can make that argument. I don't think it's true, but facts are my weakest tool since I'm not in possession of facts any better than anyone else is, I have to make judgement calls about what I think the facts probably are. In my judgement, Donetsk and Luhansk are mostly pro-Russian, even moreso pro-independence from both of them. I could be wrong. I've heard a lot of 'facts' and I don't know which ones are bullshit. My point is just that any negotiation needs to start from the way things are, not the way things were or are wished to be, and if you want to use this argument about various regions that is totally fine with me. Swing around to Israel-Palestine and you see the same thing. Palestine argues from their position in 1948... In fact they argue from their position prior to the Belfour Declaration in 1917. That is an unreasonable position for negotiation because the actual on the ground situation isn't anywhere close to that. Maybe they are right about what should have happened, but chanting "from the river to the sea Palestine will be free" is not only pointless, it hurts their cause. Gaza is isolated from the West Bank, fuctionally Israel divided them in 1947, and even more so in 1967. Refusing to accept their loss and insisting on getting it all back is not a negotiating position that will ever succeed, even if it is morally justified. Israel negotiates with Hamas because effectively, defacto, Hamas is the government of Gaza. And Hamas accepts deals that don't go anywhere close to "from the river to the sea" because when it comes to negotiations, that is simply how it works -- you start from the actual situation right now, not the one you wish were true or that you remember. I've never seen Western leaders (including Ukraine) admit that they lost land to Russia and negotiate from the current situation. Putin has said talks have to start from the current situation, and Western leaders insist they start from a prior situation. Such a demand ensures peace talks cannot happen, which is probably their intention.
Its the same reason you have any opinion at all as the reason ukraine is being razed. The US will stop funding the war when they run out of ukranians to kill. Then the war funding will switch to "rebuilding" and ukraine will bet trillions of US dollars to make schools and libraries and stadiums and all the while the children will be human trafficked and the rest will be groomed into fetishes and hypnotized into removing their sex organs. Go USA!
I know, but it's still fun to make a peace agreement. It is the popular thing. Everybody is doing it.
If you put it that way... Here's my peace agreement: NATO and Russia agree to merge forces against China, India and Brazil. We bind in agreement to make eternal war with them, and only halt agressions long enough for them to regroup and put up another fight. We intentionally never defeat them, weaken them to maximum suffering, but never totally obliterate them so we can keep alive our military-industrial deficit spending. The Russian parts of Ukraine are given to Russia, and the rest of Ukraine is restored to slave status to serve Israeli prosperity and all its remaining male inhabitants are not allowed to leave and are forced to farm to supply grain which is then given as a daily burnt offering to Baal. Any female under the age of 12 is made a sex slave of the European aristocracy, and when they turn 18 they are bled to death to be served to the American hegemony. Their bodies are butchered and served as hourderves during the centuries old banking families' hourly ritual satanic infant sacrifice ceremonies. How did I do?
You weren't supposed to put that into print! I hereby excommnicate you from the secret order!
I think my proposal has the highest chance of being accepted
That is only because it has already been accepted long ago. Those are the standing orders.
Seems like Ukraine gets nothing out of this deal other than peace.
Ok, let's assume based on your assessment Ukraine says "no" to this deal. What happens next? Does Ukraine get back all its former territory? No. I think it goes on to lose a lot more territory. I think this agreement is generous in that regard. Compare it to Putin's suggested deal in which * Russia gets all of Kherson and Zaphorizia * Ukraine must demilitarize and denazify My deal is a better deal for Ukraine, and one that Russia might accept. I don't think Russia would accept less because, put simply, they are winning. I'm not making any normative statements here. I'm not saying Russia SHOULD get something or that Russia isn't wrong. I'm being diplomatic based on the actual on-the-ground state of things. If you insist I make normative pronouncements, then Russia was wrong for invading and Ukraine has every right to join NATO. But I'm a realist, not a fantasist.
Without any securities guarantees they’ll just be sitting ducks for another run at some more lands down the road 🤷♂️
Fair point. Add in some security guarantees for Ukraine of some sort... maybe Russian assets held in Western institutions that can be confiscated if... oh wait, that's already happened. Doesn't seem to work.
My point is it’s NATO or nothing for Ukraine. Putin sort of screwed himself with that genius move…
Putin's thinking was that NATO couldn't admit Ukraine if Ukraine was at war with Russia because that would immediately put NATO at war with Russia. And so by attacking Ukraine they prevented Ukraine from joining NATO. I'm sure Putin did not expect as much Western backing as Ukraine has gotten. But even with that Western backing, Ukraine is still not in NATO and NATO is still not at direct war with Russia. So we don't have a decisive answer as to whether Putin's strategy "screwed himself" or not, we have to wait for the future to show us who is the better strategist, Vladimir Putin or karnage.
I’m no strategist 😂
Ah man! I wanted to get an autographed copy of your next book!
But who will sell Europe energy? That’s what this is really all about.
In your scenario, it is unclear why Ukraine is needed at all. If neither NATO nor Russia can use it, this country will simply be erased from the world map as unnecessary.
I don't think smaller countries are just the playthings of the great powers. I think they can have independent self-rule. But as to whether such an agreement would be agreed to, probably not, and probably because of your point. Both sides want to profit from Ukraine, neither side would allow Ukraine to be independent and neutral. But I'm not really serious in my proposal. I just wanted to make another peace proposal since it is the popular thing right now.
Peace isn't profitable