Conversation

Notices

1. Embed this notice
   Viceroyess (blingring@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:44:02 JST Viceroyess
   Jets? Bomber drones? Sick of it. WAR PIGS. As Yanis Varoufakis, former says 👇
   
   https://youtu.be/LQUXuQ6Zd9w
   • Embed this notice
     The Dread Slender Gnome (gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:43:59 JST The Dread Slender Gnome

     in reply to

     @blingring I’ll give you my absolute best case scenario.

     Putin has a stroke or a heart attack. He is replaced by people who understand that the war is a disaster and don’t have too much ego/status in the game. These people find some excuse for Russia to establish a ceasefire, order the troops to withdraw, explain it somehow to the propagandists, and agree to pre- Feb 2022 borders peace treaty. Ukraine gets started with rebuilding, begrudgingly since there’s still Donbas and Crimea, Russia gets back to trying to somehow make things work, and will tone down the power-based foreign politics.

     This would be the path of least harm and thus the best outcome. Unfortunately, I don’t think it’s likely.

     Seahorses are horses likes this.
   • Embed this notice
     The Dread Slender Gnome (gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:44:00 JST The Dread Slender Gnome

     in reply to

     @blingring I read that, and here are my comments. TL;DR: lovely idea, but fails at the first point.

     An immediate ceasefire to be followed by a rapid withdrawal of Russian troops behind the 24-2-2022 border line

     This is the minimum first step required for a peace process. It’s not going to happen until Russia realises its campaign is doomed to fail. No amount of demands is going to cause Russia to withdraw. Only clear military failure (or full political/economic collapse) will do that.

     The creation of a fully demilitarised zone, 200km on each side of the 24-2-2022 border line, to be monitored by means jointly agreed

     Not a good idea. It would effectively leave 200km on Ukrainian side undefended. Any monitoring that falls short of actually having troops on the ground to counter an attack, will be considered too risky by Ukrainians and is likely to fail if/when Russia becomes belligerent again. All they would have to do, is to drive across the 200km on their side and hey presto, they would be in undefended Ukrainian territory.

     A mutual non-aggression protocol based on the recognition that Ukraine is a sovereign, militarily neutral country that allows no nuclear weapons on its territory

     They already had this in the Budapest memorandum. Russia showed no respect for it. There’s no reason at this point to assume Russia will respect the next version. This by the way, is also in keeping with a very long history of Russian foreign and military policy.

     A governance structure for the Eastern and Southern areas of Ukraine based on the Northern Ireland Good Friday Agreement to ensure political equality between the Russian and Ukrainian speaking communities

     Seeing as the first point was withdrawal to pre-2022 borders, this must refer to Crimea and Donbas. This would have some chance of influencing the outcome, if the Russian claims of being worried about the political status of Russian speakers in these areas were made in good faith. There’s a lot of evidence suggesting that they are not, and evidence that they have considered pulling the same thing elsewhere. But sure, why not.

     All parties agree to refer outstanding disputes pre-existing the 24-02-2022 invasion to UN facilitated negotiations

     As far as I know, there’s exactly one case of a serious territorial dispute succesfully and permanently being solved by UN or it’s predecessor. That was the dispute Finland and Sweden had over the Åland islands. And that only worked because both nations were oriented towards international co-operation and peaceful solutions, and they were already friendly with each other so they had every reason to expect the other side to honour the agreement as well.

     But fundamentally, the whole thing falls down already at the first point. As long as Russia has any reason to think they might at the very least be able to grind the war into a stalemate that neither side has the power to break, they have no reason to withdraw. If they think they can solidify their control over the territories, or even capture more land, that’s even more the case.

     I’m sure Ukraine would absolutely welcome an immediate withdrawal of Russian troops behind the 2022 borders. That might even go some way to mitigating what now must be phenomenal distrust of Russian foreign politics on their part. But I don’t see that being on the cards, and I don’t think Ukraine does either.

   • Embed this notice
     Viceroyess (blingring@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:44:00 JST Viceroyess

     in reply to

     • The Dread Slender Gnome
     @Gnomeshatecheese thank you, this is thorough and will digest. In the meantime on the first point, "An immediate ceasefire to be followed by a rapid withdrawal of Russian troops behind the 24-2-2022 border line" is a blocker? I have no idea what the date signifies?
     
     Do you have any thoughts on what could bring an end?
   • Embed this notice
     The Dread Slender Gnome (gnomeshatecheese@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:44:01 JST The Dread Slender Gnome

     in reply to

     • F O T T F S O F A W Y G T F O S M......................

     @xzy45 @blingring I’m wondering how he imagines an “honourable peace process” would take place at this time without an expectation, or demand, that Ukraine give in and allow Russia to keep more or less of its ill-gotten gains. I’m also wondering why he’s not considering the precedent that would set for Russia’s foreign policy in the future.

     Varoufiakis isn’t an idiot. But I don’t really understand what he’s thinking here.

   • Embed this notice
     Viceroyess (blingring@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:44:01 JST Viceroyess

     in reply to

     • The Dread Slender Gnome
     @Gnomeshatecheese The proposal he referenced is here: https://t.co/qPam376hd3
   • Embed this notice
     F O T T F S O F A W Y G T F O S M...................... (xzy45@spinster.xyz)'s status on Wednesday, 17-May-2023 05:44:02 JST F O T T F S O F A W Y G T F O S M......................

     in reply to
     @blingring that tweet is nonsensical. How does he propose they defend themselves, otherwise an even greater bloodbath if they can't defend themselves, or the alternative being totally controlled by Putin.
     
     The tweeter has made some grave assumptions about Putin there and makes himself sound stupid.