It is possible that Russians understand that nobody would agree to such egregious conditions, and do this so they can claim that ukrainian "nazi" government is "refusing negotiations".
They wouldn’t, that’s the whole point of Russia demanding negotiations be held in Belarus. Russia doesn’t actually want to negotiate, they want to be able to blame Ukraine for not negotiating to strengthen their domestic case for war.
> If the talks are rejected, the Ukrainian side shall bear all responsibility for bloodshed
On my personal opinion this is another case of Russia making unacceptable requests ( bring our #1 target in a nation hostile to you ) and blame the other party when this doesn't happen
Because they don't care about fooling you ('the West'). It was done for internal consumption, as usual. I expect them to put the blame on Ukrainian diplomats in the evening news.
I believe it could be also an excuse to justify ( internally ) why the war is going so slow. "It is not that Ukrainians don't want to be saved and are fighting hard, it is because we want to give them opportunities for diplomacy and we stopped the hostility for a day"
They probably can't do much other than trying to keep this rhetoric, but the truth is that at the moment, and probably for the foreseeable future, Putin and the regime "word" lost any worth.
Doing what ever pleases you after saying you're doing something, like saying you won't do something while preparing to do the opposite has consequences. Duplicity has consequences. It might work internally, or against smaller isolated countries (regrettably), which is great for dictators...
Trust was shattered, even if we accuse the West of being naive - still - in diplomacy trust paramount.
I don't see how Putin will set his feet back into this globalized world. Who would trust his word for anything?
So if the goal was to completely isolate Russia, destroy it's importance in the global theater in a time of change, that was achieved.
What, they don't have email? What exactly is being proposed here? What would be the point of face to face negotiations? Since people are actively dying right now, why would you wait for people to be in the same spot?
I hope you aren't serious. Same reason why any important meeting is held face to face and not delegated to email. How do you verify who you are talking with? How do you make sure the communication isn't tampered with? From Russia's point of view how you make sure email with insane demands is not leaked?
I think for something like this they could afford the bother to have someone sign the emails. World leaders make pronouncements all the time and there is no problem with provenance. Everyone knows the issues and existing proposals/demands. You only have to cover whatever has changed.
>From Russia's point of view how you make sure email with insane demands is not leaked?
Any insane demands will be leaked by the other party. Nations can't have secret discussions that mean anything.
China seems to have been blindsided on this war. They most likely were made aware of the republics but certainly didn't expect full invasion. On day 2, china demanded diplomatic talks, hosted in china. Russia refused. Said they could happen in their puppet belarus. Which is outrageous and a huge slap in the face to China.
Russia saying they stand for peace is absolutely absurd. Everyone around the world knows it is Russia who is the aggressor.
>"If the talks are rejected, the Ukrainian side shall bear all responsibility for bloodshed," Medinsky said. "But we remain here until 15:00 waiting for a response from the Ukrainian side."
On the contrary. Russia bears ALL responsibility hence forth regardless of anything Russia ever says or does.
>"We are waiting. Everyone is in Gomel waiting. If they come then there will be negotiations," Lukashenko
Oh ya, I bet they are waiting. I bet China is on the brink of breaking their alliance.
The UK used to own Hong Kong, Portugal Macau. Those were rightfully returned to China.
Russia still holds Chinese land.
If you also look at it, China was going to uphold the right for these new republics to exist.Casting significant doubt on China's intention to invade Taiwan.
You will notice this Russian spy: https://globalnews.ca/author/rachel-gilmore/ stopped publishing quite abruptly. At exactly the same time the russian invasion was happening and the Canadian government getting wise. Did she escape back to Russia or did the RCMP pick her up? We may never know.
We must also face the possibility that our perception of China has been manipulated by Russian spies. That China is actually our ally and Xi Jinping no longer believes in territorial borders or at least any need to move them. China's very long history has never been about expansion. The list of wars involving China is quite small.
Second link is a standoff where China maintained peace.
First link did have some death, but for the most part China backed off and was trying to deescalate the situation? This is also India, who aren't slumps. India being generally considered the aggressor because they felt some road construction was in disputed land? Pakistan held India responsible for the entire thing. Europe found the aggression from india was unwarranted.
In fact, I look at both of those as China doing the right thing.
>>>That China is actually our ally and Xi Jinping no longer believes in territorial borders or at least any need to move them. China's very long history has never been about expansion. The list of wars involving China is quite small.
Let's be honest here. China is using Russia to see how this goes, if it goes negative, they will abandon Russia. If Russia would have seized Ukraine within 2 days, the wouldn't have done anything.
They are just playing the waiting game and try to take advantage of it, see the "Art of War".
And if you didn't realize it. Russia is now dependant on China, not the other way arround. China will get their cheap resources and Russia will have a lot less export markets/profits. It's litterally a win for China without doing anything.
In the meantime, there will be a strategic change in the West where the old idea of "trade will help democracy" is abandoned and the realization that it can't be applied anymore for 'bad actors'.
Russia would never have continued on this path without China's permission. If China was "our ally", they would have voted as such on the security council, instead of lifting restrictions on Russia - https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/25/business/wheat-russia-chi...
Well, I do not support these Chinese actions but they need food. They are crazy about their food security. Something to keep in mind in world politics.
Can we agree that there is an ongoing shift from a unipolar moment (1990-ca.2015) to a multipolar world (basically US & China)?
What confuses me in this "shift" that there is still very much a 'cold war rhetoric' inherent pushed by NATO and transatlantic alliances which very existence relies on seeing Russia through the lens of constant threat which in turn proliferated the nationalistic and militaristic currents and tendencies in Post-Soviet Russia. This dynamic was indeed anticipated way back in 1997 [0] when the Clinton administration - at the height of 'unipolarity'- made their policiy decision not to pivot from the myopic Europe-Russia view to the vantage point of emerging Asia by not solidifying the alliance of the Yeltsin era of Russia with new military partnerships.
So, in the 'dark' (in the now comfortable fully locked transantlantic view) there was brewing a greater and greater resentment and Putin successfully captured back the imaginations.
Now we find ourselves in 2022 where the transatlantic power in Europe has successfully severed Russia from Europe, so much that the clearly waning Putin went all-in bluffing, so far Russia is losing. I'm not sure if the cost for the US and the EU is worth it in the long run. But if China stays calm and patient it can 'take in' a heavily bleeding and sufficiently defused Russia by very little work on their own.
Edit: The more I learn about the current 'military operation' the more I'm baffled. From a military perspective he had a lot of options in taking down and significantly weakening the Ukrainian military instead he amassed a huge army to 'invade' at a high cost (resources, operational precision and morale) when long-term 'occupation' wasn't his goal in the first place but - deriving from the actions in the past 8 years - creating a 'buffer state' alike to 2012 and/or effectivley splitting Ukraine (Donetsk/Luhansk etc). It doesn't make sense for me in the light of his former actions, it looks like a self-inflicting wound from afar. Maybe the experience in Georgia from 2008 has something to do with it, the utter international isolation, internal crisis ... I'm trying to figure this still out. The US in the past had also made very poor choices (at least in their unipolarity), so maybe this was a long overdue 'twitch' on the part of the hawkish delusional Russians. Militarization is certainly experiencing a scary revival in Europe, now.
Please remember that Russia has a different definition for 'nazi' compared to most Western countries. In Russian's narratives it means anyone against them.
"Results of my conversation with Alexander Lukashenko.
We agreed that the Ukrainian delegation will meet with the Russian one without pre-conditions on the Ukraine-Belarus border near the Pripyat river.
Alexander Lukashenko took personal responsibility for all planes, helicopters, and rockets on Belarusian territory staying grounded during our travel there, the talks, and the return of the Ukrainian delegation."
The Russians assassinated the Chechen leader on his way to peace talks 26 years ago.
IMO the US should at least consider having VP Harris join Zalensky as an observer to help broker the talks. Make it very known to the Russians that she is with him, to deter possible assassination attempts.
No, that would make Russians have a propaganda field day falsely saying that the USA controlled Ukraine. Instead nato should allow Ukraine to announce the 2nd in commands from two
Other main European countries like France and Sweden to come as observers.
That’s a very good point. Perhaps non-NATO EU countries (Sweden, Finland, Ireland?) would even be best as NATO itself is such a flashpoint for the conflict.
44 comments
[ 200 ms ] story [ 1512 ms ] threadTurkey, Bulgaria, Romania...
On my personal opinion this is another case of Russia making unacceptable requests ( bring our #1 target in a nation hostile to you ) and blame the other party when this doesn't happen
Doing what ever pleases you after saying you're doing something, like saying you won't do something while preparing to do the opposite has consequences. Duplicity has consequences. It might work internally, or against smaller isolated countries (regrettably), which is great for dictators...
Trust was shattered, even if we accuse the West of being naive - still - in diplomacy trust paramount.
I don't see how Putin will set his feet back into this globalized world. Who would trust his word for anything?
So if the goal was to completely isolate Russia, destroy it's importance in the global theater in a time of change, that was achieved.
>From Russia's point of view how you make sure email with insane demands is not leaked?
Any insane demands will be leaked by the other party. Nations can't have secret discussions that mean anything.
Russia saying they stand for peace is absolutely absurd. Everyone around the world knows it is Russia who is the aggressor.
>"If the talks are rejected, the Ukrainian side shall bear all responsibility for bloodshed," Medinsky said. "But we remain here until 15:00 waiting for a response from the Ukrainian side."
On the contrary. Russia bears ALL responsibility hence forth regardless of anything Russia ever says or does.
>"We are waiting. Everyone is in Gomel waiting. If they come then there will be negotiations," Lukashenko
Oh ya, I bet they are waiting. I bet China is on the brink of breaking their alliance.
You must remember, China hates Russia. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_of_Peking
The UK used to own Hong Kong, Portugal Macau. Those were rightfully returned to China.
Russia still holds Chinese land.
If you also look at it, China was going to uphold the right for these new republics to exist.Casting significant doubt on China's intention to invade Taiwan.
I wrote here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30471021 about how Russian spies have infiltrated Canadian media. They pushed utter lies that Canadians are nazis. For example, https://globalnews.ca/news/8543281/covid-trucker-convoy-orga...
You will notice this Russian spy: https://globalnews.ca/author/rachel-gilmore/ stopped publishing quite abruptly. At exactly the same time the russian invasion was happening and the Canadian government getting wise. Did she escape back to Russia or did the RCMP pick her up? We may never know.
We must also face the possibility that our perception of China has been manipulated by Russian spies. That China is actually our ally and Xi Jinping no longer believes in territorial borders or at least any need to move them. China's very long history has never been about expansion. The list of wars involving China is quite small.
LOL. What has "long history" got to do with what the CCP is doing now?
What have they done exactly? Specifics please?
The obvious reality that Russian spies have infiltrated Canadian media makes me question this 'China is about to invade Taiwan' stuff.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017_China%E2%80%93India_borde...
First link did have some death, but for the most part China backed off and was trying to deescalate the situation? This is also India, who aren't slumps. India being generally considered the aggressor because they felt some road construction was in disputed land? Pakistan held India responsible for the entire thing. Europe found the aggression from india was unwarranted.
In fact, I look at both of those as China doing the right thing.
I take both links as evidence for my position.
I am sure you do wumao.
You can't be serious...
>>>What have they done exactly? Specifics please?
Sent 300,000 men to intervene in Korea because we got too close to their border, significantly prolonging the war and killing thousands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Korean_War#China_intervenes_(O...
Invaded and Annexed Tibet: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Tibet_by_the_Peo...
Killed 30,000 Vietnamese in a border war: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sino-Vietnamese_War
Killed another 64 Vietnamese over some barely-there islands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_South_Reef_Skirmish
and besides the Taiwan issue, China claims Japan's Senkaku Islands: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Senkaku_Islands_dispute
Chinese espionage agents are busy stealing every piece of info they can from the US: https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/fbi-director-...
Let's be honest here. China is using Russia to see how this goes, if it goes negative, they will abandon Russia. If Russia would have seized Ukraine within 2 days, the wouldn't have done anything.
They are just playing the waiting game and try to take advantage of it, see the "Art of War".
And if you didn't realize it. Russia is now dependant on China, not the other way arround. China will get their cheap resources and Russia will have a lot less export markets/profits. It's litterally a win for China without doing anything.
In the meantime, there will be a strategic change in the West where the old idea of "trade will help democracy" is abandoned and the realization that it can't be applied anymore for 'bad actors'.
Russia would never have continued on this path without China's permission. If China was "our ally", they would have voted as such on the security council, instead of lifting restrictions on Russia - https://edition.cnn.com/2022/02/25/business/wheat-russia-chi...
Can we agree that there is an ongoing shift from a unipolar moment (1990-ca.2015) to a multipolar world (basically US & China)?
What confuses me in this "shift" that there is still very much a 'cold war rhetoric' inherent pushed by NATO and transatlantic alliances which very existence relies on seeing Russia through the lens of constant threat which in turn proliferated the nationalistic and militaristic currents and tendencies in Post-Soviet Russia. This dynamic was indeed anticipated way back in 1997 [0] when the Clinton administration - at the height of 'unipolarity'- made their policiy decision not to pivot from the myopic Europe-Russia view to the vantage point of emerging Asia by not solidifying the alliance of the Yeltsin era of Russia with new military partnerships.
So, in the 'dark' (in the now comfortable fully locked transantlantic view) there was brewing a greater and greater resentment and Putin successfully captured back the imaginations. Now we find ourselves in 2022 where the transatlantic power in Europe has successfully severed Russia from Europe, so much that the clearly waning Putin went all-in bluffing, so far Russia is losing. I'm not sure if the cost for the US and the EU is worth it in the long run. But if China stays calm and patient it can 'take in' a heavily bleeding and sufficiently defused Russia by very little work on their own.
[0]https://web.archive.org/web/20190503072531/https://www.nytim...
Edit: The more I learn about the current 'military operation' the more I'm baffled. From a military perspective he had a lot of options in taking down and significantly weakening the Ukrainian military instead he amassed a huge army to 'invade' at a high cost (resources, operational precision and morale) when long-term 'occupation' wasn't his goal in the first place but - deriving from the actions in the past 8 years - creating a 'buffer state' alike to 2012 and/or effectivley splitting Ukraine (Donetsk/Luhansk etc). It doesn't make sense for me in the light of his former actions, it looks like a self-inflicting wound from afar. Maybe the experience in Georgia from 2008 has something to do with it, the utter international isolation, internal crisis ... I'm trying to figure this still out. The US in the past had also made very poor choices (at least in their unipolarity), so maybe this was a long overdue 'twitch' on the part of the hawkish delusional Russians. Militarization is certainly experiencing a scary revival in Europe, now.
"Results of my conversation with Alexander Lukashenko.
We agreed that the Ukrainian delegation will meet with the Russian one without pre-conditions on the Ukraine-Belarus border near the Pripyat river.
Alexander Lukashenko took personal responsibility for all planes, helicopters, and rockets on Belarusian territory staying grounded during our travel there, the talks, and the return of the Ukrainian delegation."
1: https://t.me/V_Zelenskiy_official/745
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dzhokhar_Dudayev#Death_and_leg...
IMO the US should at least consider having VP Harris join Zalensky as an observer to help broker the talks. Make it very known to the Russians that she is with him, to deter possible assassination attempts.
Interesting, do you have a link?
https://www.thecanadianencyclopedia.ca/en/article/chechen-le...
Assassinated he was, but he wasn't en route to peace talks at the time.