Ukraine (Mod Note & Threadbanned Users in OP)

Heraclius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745218#Comment_118745218

Unless the Russian army collapses entirely it is hard to see a situation where Ukraine would get Donetsk and Luhansk back. It would be difficult to admit they are gone forever though. Appointing a Russian proxy as PM and staying out of NATO and the EU would seem to go against what the Ukrainians want.

Christy42

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745265#Comment_118745265

If nothing else it would be completely giving up on democracy as a concept in the Ukraine to simply appoint a PM based on a foreign power's say so.

Heraclius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745320#Comment_118745320

Where is Boyko currently? If he's in Kyiv then he's getting a lot of suspicious glares right now.

Quin_Dub

So basically the Russian offer is "Give us everything that we want and we'll stop killing you"?

Those are terms being offered for accepting a Ukrainian surrender , not negotiating.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745265#Comment_118745265

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745218#Comment_118745218

Hypothetically:

• Point one - A disgrace but under the circumstances, possible
• Point Two - A further disgrace but, Possible
• Point Three - Nonsense. If Russia gain materially from this (an abomination in my view) - THATS IT - Ukraine have applied for EU membership and while the whens, and the hows, remain ambiguous. They will eventually join. 100% GIVE NO GROUND on this IMHO
• Point Three (Part two) - I would POSSIBLY accept not joining NATO - IF: Russia agreed that they, and NATO, would be co-guarantors of Ukrainian Independence, Sovereignty, and Neutrality. With said treaty being signed at the UN, under full International observation. So that, if anything like this starts again, a LEGAL AVENUE for NATO involvement would be present. This would be the ONLY way i would give any ground. An internationally accepted treaty, legally binding, with full acceptance that Russia signs, and understands their LEGAL obligations. And NATO guarantees that they can enforce these obligations - Akin to Neutrality backed by NATO, no NATO forces stationed in Ukraine (Sickened writing this but im remaining as dispassionate as i can for the purposes of discussion)
• Point four - Garbage - nonsense - not going to address it - its rubbish and the Russians (i suspect) know this

I reiterate my earlier opinion that the Ukraine has rights, and Russia is entirely in the wrong, but i welcome peoples opinions on the above - but the points above, - IMHO there is room there to work on something

Gatling

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745347#Comment_118745347

They alot want the Ukrainian military disarmed and disbanded

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745365#Comment_118745365

Out of the question. IMHO - i gave a hypothetical above, but let me restate - the Ukraine remains a Neutral country in NATO/MOSCOW relations - but it IS ARMED and has a STANDING ARMY - 100% - precedents available

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745218#Comment_118745218

Kinda flies in the face of the bullshít "liberation from Nazis" angle some would have us believe when the Russian's own demands allow a persistence of the current government - and makes no mention of denazification either. While demanding the insertion of an unelected PM also flies in the face of the invading force being the tip of a democratic spear.

I've presumed from the outset the two breakaway regions would be non-negotiable in any treaty. That once the Russians stepped in that was it - they were lost to Ukraine. It also seems like demanding codification to block entry into the EU or NATO becomes irrelevant with the separatist regions in play; I can't see either grouping want as fractious an eastern border as Ukraine's.

busunderer

Zelinsky seems intent on avoiding a resolution - he is using civilians as defence lines

Gatling

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745384#Comment_118745384

I can't see it happening ,

Russia only have one thing in mind , surrender your country , disband your military and become neutral but ukraine doesn't have to worry because Russian peace keepers will be permanently based in Ukraine to protect them from foreign aggression

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745421#Comment_118745421

Its out of the question. Ukraine cannot accept those terms. There is some ground (sadly metaphorically and literally) to be given but there are red lines. imho

kksaints

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745218#Comment_118745218

On the 4 points. Points 3 and 4 are unacceptable. Point 1 is an unfortunate reality that isn't going to change at this stage and might just have to be accepted. Point 2 is similar but is also complicated by border issues.

johnnyskeleton

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745405#Comment_118745405

I think he very much is interested in a resolution. In fact, if Russia were to say that Ukraine recognises their annexation of Crimea and agrees to supply it with infrastructure e.g. water, and that Donetsk PR and Lughansk PR are independent (with appropriate borders drawn in geographic Donbas), I think he would take it. He would have to take it, really.

But no functional democratic state can accept a demand that it disarm itself and agree to be governed by a puppet ruler. He is entirely reasonable to reject these demands out of hand.

As to using civilians as defense lines, on the contrary it is the Russians who are planning to kill the civilians. They have provided "humanitarian corridors", but these only lead to Russian or Belorussian territory. So at best only Russian sympathetic and non-Ukrainian or Russian citizens can use them. At worst, it is an excuse to say that because they gave civilians a chance to leave, that everyone who has stayed behind must be a militant, and therefore justify destroying whole cities.

Brussels Sprout

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745440#Comment_118745440

With regard to points #1 & #2 there are some parallels with our own history specifically what voters were asked to vote for in 1998 - altering the constitution to relinquish the claim on the 6 counties (as part of the good Friday agreement).

The major differences there were that the Northern Ireland had been created 75 years earlier and also we were reasonably certain that the British army wouldn't subsequently try and mount an invasion to take more of our territory. The Ukrainians could never be certain of that - especially if they remain outside of NATO.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745457#Comment_118745457

I agree with you 100% - i think the NATO question is solvable - IF all the Russians want is Ukraine not joining NATO, that would have to be accompanied by an international treaty (with NATO/WEST as guarantors) for a Sovereign Free Ukraine. Neutral, but armed. Which is 100% FREE to join the EU

And the bit about a Russian puppet as Vice PM, is garbage

Heraclius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745545#Comment_118745545

The Russian puppet isn't as problematic if Ukraine maintains a military and can get a security guarantee from NATO. He's a massive problem if they are defenceless.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745588#Comment_118745588

Excellent point - the Guarantee from the west is the crucial condition really - and EU Membership too IMHO

Heraclius

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745619#Comment_118745619

Yes, it's the only point that truly matters.

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745626#Comment_118745626

The two red lines would be:

• EU membership the right of the UKRAINE
• Ukraine refrains from joining NATO, only with a full Western/NATO backed security guarantee. Whereby the aforementioned parties guarantee the sovereignty of Ukrainian borders (this is obviously the real negotiation).

It would certainly mean that no legal impediment would exist to NATO involvement, if the Kremlin 'conjures' more 'NAZI' threats in the Ukraine at some future point

johnnyskeleton

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745505#Comment_118745505

I suppose Russia's strongest claim is to Crimea. It was part of Russia until the 1950s where it was transferred to Ukraine as part of the USSR for administrative ease. It has a majority Russian population and the percentage of ethnic Ukrainians is quite low. When the USSR fell apart, Crimea sought its own independence from Ukraine and ultimately resolved itself with a form of quasi autonomy. It also geographically discrete, being a peninsula connected by a bridge on the Russian side and a few roads etc on the land connection to Ukraine. It would be a fairly ideal place for a border.

Donbas is a trickier scenario. It was pre-2014 very pro Russian politically, at a time when there was a national debate about being closer to Russia than the EU, rather than now when the issue is the Russians invading. However, is ethnically much more divided and shares cultural and geographical links to both.

I suppose neither is entirely analogous to Northern Ireland, but perhaps Donbas is closer in that there is potentially a Russian majority, provided you draw the border line favorably (i.e. the 6 counties rather than all of Ulster). But the biggest difference is that Russia wants to use the Russian separatists of DPR and LPR for its own uses to keep control over the Ukraine, whereas if the Westminster government could wash its hands of Northern Ireland's unionist population, IMO they would do so in a heartbeat.

Pussyhands

Zelensky really seems intent on not having any Russian say or influence in Ukraine at all.

This invasion started when he put Viktor Medvedchuk on house arrest, froze his assets and removed his TV channels. Medveckchuk is chairman of the biggest opposition party in Ukraine and are pro Russian.

On 11 May 2021, the Prosecutor General of Ukraine accused Medvedchuk of treason and attempted looting of national resources in (Russian annexed but internationally recognised as Ukrainian) Crimea. Medvedchuk has been under house arrest since 13 May 2021; this measure has been prolonged four times, which means that Medvedchuk will spend at least 10 months under house arrest, even though Ukrainian law allows for a maximum of six months' house arrest.

Podge_irl

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745670#Comment_118745670

The invasion started when Russia invaded Ukraine.

Pussyhands

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745700#Comment_118745700

If you say so 👍️

kowloon

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745730#Comment_118745730

How do you define invasion so?

breezy1985

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745670#Comment_118745670

I could see how the Russians who historically have deep feelings against things like locking up (or worse) opposition leaders would be really upset by this. 🤣

Pussyhands

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745784#Comment_118745784

I have no interest in getting into pedantics with you.

johnnyskeleton

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745545#Comment_118745545

There is an argument that Putin is more concerned (or at least should be more concerned, if he were the rational actor and great strategist some would paint him to be) about Ukraine joining the EU than about them joining NATO.

If they join NATO, then it puts strain on the other allies and he can continue to undermine Ukraine from within using separatists, plausible deniability etc. This in turn could expose any potential fracture lines in NATO e.g. if in 2024 Trump were to win a re-election and he continues to undermine NATO on the basis that the US doesn't have a vital security interest in Eastern Europe. This would be a disaster for NATO, as it would mean that there is no longer the iron clad certainty of Article 5.

But more importantly, the thing Putin really doesn't want is a thriving liberal democracy constituted of people who are linguistically, geographically and culturally very close to Russia. He doesn't want his people to see how life could be, effectively.

The EU also has Article 42 which is a collective security guarantee for all memberstates. While not as clear as Article 5 NATO, it does make clear that all member states shall do all they can to help when there is an armed invasion. So EU Membership carries with it a sort of Article 5 light, which would drag EU Member States (but not the US) into any future war with Russia.

I suppose the other point about a non-NATO security guarantee is that it isn't really worth the paper it is printed on. The Budapest Memorandum of 1994 was an international agreement between Russia and Ukraine that Ukraine would give up its nuclear weapons on condition that Russia recognise its 1991 borders. That too was countersigned by the USA and the UK, but you don't see them leaping to the rescue for Ukraine in 2022!

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745670#Comment_118745670

I think you could say he opposes NON DEMOCRATIC influence. If pro russian voters wish to back and elect Pro-Russian politicians - thats one thing

If Russia insists on having a say in the Ukraine, as a default position - this is entirely different.

As for Viktor Medvedchuk, i genuinely dont follow your reasoning. He was arrested in May 2021 (its in your own quote), yet you state the invasion began with this?? Im trying to find information but much is in Russian/Ukrainian but it seems this guy was a puppet who supported the 'separatists'

<from Wikipedia>

"In May 2021, Ukrainian media published a recorded audio in which Medvedchuk congratulated the leader of the so-called Donetsk People's Republic Denis Pushilin on Victory Day and wished him further "victories." In addition, Medvedchuk was impressed by a military parade in Donetsk"

"On 11 May 2021, Medvedchuk and fellow Opposition Platform — For Life lawmaker Taras Kozak were named as suspects for alleged high treason and the illegal exploitation of natural resources in Ukraine's Russian-annexed Crimea. Three days later Medvedchuk was put under house arrest and fitted with an electronic tracking device"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2022/02/28/ukraine-russia-medvedchuck/

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/ukraine-slaps-sanctions-tv-channel-tied-russian-coup-plot-claim-2022-02-11/

@Pussyhands what is your actual position on this? Is the Ukraine not correct in its re-affirmation of Ukrainian Sovereignty and independence? Are you suggesting that the Ukraine 'brought this on themselves' by placing someone under 'house arrest'??????

liamtech

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745730#Comment_118745730

@Pussyhands PLEASE BACK THIS OBVIOUS DENIAL UP WITH FACTS

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745700#Comment_118745700

How is the above not the case?

johnnyskeleton

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/118745670#Comment_118745670

Do you blame him? Other than Lukashenko or Tokayev, both of whom are propped up as quasi-dictators for Russia, does anyone want any Russian say or influence in their country? Like, would you want Russian influence or a say in Ireland?