Ukraine

[Peerie Maa]

This series is currntly being aired on our TV
Putin vs the West

From the 2014 seizure of Crimea to the invasion of Ukraine, this is the inside story of a decade of clashes - as told by the Western leaders who traded blows with Putin's Russia.
3 Episodes Available

Start WatchingSeries 1: 1. My Backyard

It includes film of interviews with the "Western" leaders.

[sandtown]

The problem with that theory is that the west hasn't blocked any negotiations. Before the invasion ago it was Russia refusing to uphold an agreement.

It was Ukraine that refused to implement the Minsk Accords, that could have avoided war. Perhaps.

And the US along with lap dog Boris Johnson most certainly did try to block a peace deal . .

If you want to live in a "democratic country", don't count on the Hyperpower - just ask the Chileans, Brazilians, Iranians and many others.

[Osborne Russell]

It was Ukraine that refused to implement the Minsk Accords, that could have avoided war. Perhaps.

And the US along with lap dog Boris Johnson most certainly did try to block a peace deal . .

If you want to live in a "democratic country", don't count on the Hyperpower - just ask the Chileans, Brazilians, Iranians and many others.

Right. And if, as any citizen anywhere,, but particularly as a Ukrainian, you want, in perpetuity, not by strength, but by principle, a guarantee of territory, sovereignty and unalienable human rights -- and environmental protection, goes without saying -- make sure and ask the Russians for "negotiations", because they will surely know what is just -- GTFOOH how can you shame yourself like this? If you really believe so strongly that "the Hyperpower" can never be other, never mind better, than what you believe it to be, then why are you here, in the heart of it, working and paying taxes to support it? Your location gives the lie to your statements. Perhaps you're not here at all. Convince me. I'd rather you were a bot than such a effed up American, once sworn to her defense. A casualty. A loss, to be entered on the books as . . . a loss. I hate to chalk things up as losses, especially my fellow citizens.

The Kyshtym disaster, sometimes referred to as the Mayak disaster or Ozyorsk disaster in newer sources, was a radioactive contamination accident that occurred on 29 September 1957 at Mayak, a plutonium production site for nuclear weapons and nuclear fuel reprocessing plant located in the closed city of Chelyabinsk-40 (now Ozyorsk) in Chelyabinsk Oblast, Russian SFSR, Soviet Union.

-- wikipedia

I said I wasn't going to feed the trolls. If sandtown is a troll, I apologize. Is sandtown a troll?

[lupussonic]

I said I wasn't going to feed the trolls. If sandtown is a troll, I apologize. Is sandtown a troll?

No, just a guilt ridden crazed ex-killer who believed Uncle Sams lies and went and did unspeakable things in the name of, and now staring down his own PTSD barrel needs desperately to catch up with the rest of us.

[Peerie Maa]

On the Minsk Accord, there is this by Chatham House, a very well respected think tank.
https://www.chathamhouse.org/2020/05...astern-ukraine

Summary

• The Minsk agreements of September 2014 and February 2015, which sought to end Russia’s war in eastern Ukraine, rest on two irreconcilable interpretations of Ukraine’s sovereignty – what could be called the ‘Minsk conundrum’: is Ukraine sovereign, as Ukrainians insist, or should its sovereignty be limited, as Russia demands?
• Ukraine sees the agreements as instruments with which to re-establish its sovereignty in line with the following sequence: a ceasefire; a Russian withdrawal from eastern Ukraine; return of the Russia/Ukraine border to Ukrainian control; free and fair elections in the Donbas region; and a limited devolution of power to Russia’s proxy regimes, which would be reintegrated and resubordinated to the authorities in Kyiv. Ukraine would be able to make its own domestic and foreign policy choices.
• Russia sees the Minsk agreements as tools with which to break Ukraine’s sovereignty. Its interpretation reverses key elements in the sequence of actions: elections in occupied Donbas would take place before Ukraine had reclaimed control of the border; this would be followed by comprehensive autonomy for Russia’s proxy regimes, crippling the central authorities in Kyiv. Ukraine would be unable to govern itself effectively or orient itself towards the West.
• These contradictory provisions are testimony to a stunning failure of Russian foreign policy. In 2014 Russia launched a campaign of violent subversion to compel Ukraine to ‘federalize’ its political system. Belying Russian expectations, Ukrainians fought back en masse, forcing Russia to resort to increasingly open military intervention. Russia inflicted crushing defeats on Ukrainian forces, yet was unwilling to pay the price that further high-intensity war would have exacted.
• Western views on how to implement the Minsk agreements are imprecise and inconsistent. One prevalent view is that implementation means finding a mid-point between the Russian and Ukrainian positions. However, attempts to do so have failed – heaping pressure on Ukraine, risking political instability in Kyiv, and not leading to any discernible change in Russian policy. Instead of trying to resolve an unresolvable contradiction, Western policymakers should acknowledge the starkness of the Minsk conundrum.
• An alternative approach would make the defence of Ukraine’s sovereignty the unambiguous premise of Western policy. It would view the Minsk and Normandy processes mainly as conflict management tools. In line with the priority attached to upholding Ukraine’s sovereignty, Western governments would meanwhile maintain support for long-term political and economic reform in Ukraine, using the EU/Ukraine Association Agreement as the anchor.
• This approach would also encourage the authorities in Kyiv to engage more inclusively with those living in occupied Donbas. Yet it would proceed from the assumption that the region should not be legally reincorporated into Ukraine for the foreseeable future. Finally, this approach would logically entail a lengthy stand-off with Russia over Ukraine – a prospect that many decision-makers in the West would find troubling and unnerving.

<snip>
Conclusions

Russia’s undeclared war in Donbas is Moscow’s latest attempt to limit the sovereignty of Ukraine, which successive Russian leaders have seen as the heart of their country’s self-proclaimed sphere of influence. Having annexed Crimea in March 2014, Russia launched a campaign of violent subversion in eastern and southern Ukraine. Using teams of insurgents (local activists and provocateurs from Russia itself), Russia tried to force Ukraine to ‘federalize’ its political system. The aim was to create pro-Moscow regimes in these regions that would, once reintegrated into Ukraine, enable Russia to control its neighbour from within. The Novorossiya project quickly turned out to be a crass misjudgment – ‘a conceit of Russian geopolitical culture’ as one observer put it.96 Few locals sided with Russia. The readiness of many more to fight in self-defence compelled Russia to resort to increasingly open military intervention to save its proxies. Russia inflicted crushing defeats on Ukrainian forces in September 2014 and February 2015, yet was unwilling to pay the price that further high-intensity war would have exacted. Out of these contradictory circumstances emerged the Minsk agreements.
By almost any standard, this was a stunning failure of Russian foreign policy. The Kremlin pursued two objectives during the crisis of 2013–14. Its immediate goal was to prevent Ukraine from signing an AA with the EU. In this, it failed: the AA was signed by Ukraine and the EU in 201497 and entered into force in 2017. Russia’s second, more ambitious objective was to press Ukraine into the EAEU. Most unlikely at the time, this is virtually unimaginable now. The vision of a Russia-dominated regional bloc with Ukraine at its core – the central plank of Putin’s foreign policy when he returned as president in 2012 – is in ruins:

Russia’s goal of getting Ukraine to join a Russia-led bloc is further than ever from being realized. While many Ukrainians prefer to have good relations with both Europe and Russia, the events of 2014 have made that harder, and polling shows that, forced to choose, most would choose the EU. The war has soured the Ukrainian public toward Russia, and the fact that much of the pre-2014 population that was most pro-Russian resided in Crimea or the occupied Donbas, and cannot now vote, makes it harder still that a pro-Russian government will come to power in Kyiv. So the tension between Ukrainian democracy and Russia’s ambitions there is higher than ever.98

This tension pulses through the Minsk agreements, which reflect two irreconcilable views of Ukraine’s sovereignty – the Minsk conundrum. Ukraine sees the agreements as instruments with which to re-establish its sovereignty. It demands a meaningful and lasting ceasefire, followed by the complete withdrawal of Russian troops and the return of the border to its control. Free and fair elections in the DNR/LNR would be held according to OSCE/ODIHR standards. Power would be devolved to Donbas, broadly in line with the countrywide decentralization programme, but without giving the region constitutional ‘special status’. Following reintegration of the DNR/LNR, Ukraine would make its own domestic and foreign policy choices. By contrast, Russia views the Minsk agreements as tools with which to break Ukraine’s sovereignty. It demands that elections be held in occupied Donbas before Ukraine has reclaimed control over the border, knowing that its proxies would win. An extreme form of special status would be written into Ukraine’s constitution, crippling the central authorities and turning the DNR and LNR into Russian-controlled mini-states. Ukraine would be unable to govern itself effectively or to orient its foreign policy to the West. Only then would Russia return the border to Ukraine’s control, although it is doubtful that this would actually happen.
Western attempts to resolve the Minsk conundrum – notably, the Morel Plan and the Steinmeier Formula – have sought to bridge the Russian and Ukrainian stances. Not only have they failed; they have heaped pressure on Ukraine and made a delicate situation there even more fragile. Nor have they led to any discernible change in Russia’s stance. On the contrary, Russia’s leaders have felt vindicated in their view, first, that Ukraine is inherently weak and unviable; and, second, that Western governments lack the spine for a drawn-out confrontation. Well-intentioned attempts at conflict resolution may therefore have made a political settlement that protects Ukraine’s sovereignty even less likely. Such episodes underline the need for extreme caution when talking about Minsk implementation, which easily merges with a presumption that the Ukrainian and Russian positions can be split down the middle. Rather than searching for an optimal point acceptable to all, Western policymakers should acknowledge the starkness of the Minsk conundrum – that either Ukraine is sovereign, or it is not – and stop trying to square this circle.

[Osborne Russell]

West good, East . . . negotiate. Words to live by, for an idiot.

[Osborne Russell]

No, just a guilt ridden crazed ex-killer who believed Uncle Sams lies and went and did unspeakable things in the name of, and now staring down his own PTSD barrel needs desperately to catch up with the rest of us.

Could I put it this way: he needs to believe that "the Hyperpower" can do anything it wants to anyone, anytime, simply over-power them -- in order to fully believe that that's what "the Hyperpower" did to him, robbed him of his agency, and therefore his responsibility? What a way to go through life. But then I knew several who were outright killed in Viet Nam. Never had to watch them come back and try to recover. Their suffering ended. Ended, can you dig it?

I wasn't in Viet Nam, except by the proxy guilelessly provided by guys I knew. There was one I used to surf with, knew him from a small child. He joined the Marines. He got shot through the mouth, and was brought back to California for years in a VA hospital. I heard he had gotten a plastic face -- no skin grafts then -- a ceramic jaw, with ceramic teeth -- and a glass eye. I couldn't bring myself to go see him. They told me there was no point, he couldn't see or speak, and so, there was some question as to whether he could hear. Then I heard he died. A fragment of shrapnel worked it's way into his brain. Killed him.

I looked at my shotgun leaned up in the corner, and thought, why should I not walk into the street with it, and announce, which of you F ing honkies wants to be first? You people that lied so that he would go there, for you. You that lied about that, about American history, start to finish, from Jamestown to Martin Luther King. Right up into my life. I'd already been in the Army, I knew how to go about it, oh yeah. But I thought everything was over, but . . . it wasn't. Do you know what it means for "history" to come out of nowhere and clutch your soul? Makes you think, I better get hip to history.

I remembered this guy's face, smiling, sitting in the line-up. In fact, back then, he loaned me the board I was on. He died alone in a veteran's hospital in Long Beach, California. While outside, the waves were caressing the shore.

I know, it's long way back, from that. I'm still on that path.

And the answer that came was: the shotgun seems like the way, but it's not the way. What is the way? F if I know, but I do know, the rest of my life will be about this: the search for the way, the way out. Because to remain in it is doom, for me and my brothers.

[sandtown]

Could I put it this way: .

Great post, I did not expect that in the slightest . . .

As some guy once remarked, "There is no way to peace; peace is the way."

[Osborne Russell]

Great post, I did not expect that in the slightest . . .

As some guy once remarked, "There is no way to peace; peace is the way."

Peace is problematic, I don't care. What it takes, is what I give . . . what I owe.

Where did you think I was coming from?

[Osborne Russell]

Do you know how it feels to want to walk into the street with a shotgun? Death I can handle, killing is necessary; but lies?

[sandtown]

Do you know how it feels to want to walk into the street with a shotgun? ?

No, in spite of a good deal of anger, I do not know how that feels . . .

And if you do, get yourself some help.

[Osborne Russell]

No, in spite of a good deal of anger, I do not know how that feels . . .

And if you do, get yourself some help.

Ha ha ha Rus boy. Where this comes from, you don't know -- same as . . .

F Your "help". From where? Veterans for peace? F off. You're looking for a helper, because you can't face it on your own: individual moral standpoint. Indivdual thought, individual action, individual mortality, is what the soldier faces. What it comes down to. Individual.

[Osborne Russell]

No, in spite of a good deal of anger, I do not know how that feels . . .

Then you ain't no soldier. And it you ain't no soldier, what are you? You were pledged to kill and die, quit F ing around. Yes, you were. Stop denying it.

On behalf of what? Say it. State it. Call bull S on it. I dare you. If it's bull S, you killed for it.

[Osborne Russell]

No, in spite of a good deal of anger, I do not know how that feels . . .

And if you do, get yourself some help.

Where would I seek help, but from you? You that urges Ukraine to submit to Russia? Never.

[Osborne Russell]

Never. Viet Nam? On behalf of those who killed, and died . . . never.

[sandtown]

Never. Viet Nam? On behalf of those who killed, and died . . . never.

How about if we return this thread to its purpose ??

Our respective mental health issues cannot be addressed here.

And I NEVER wrote that UKR shouold submit - stop lying

[Osborne Russell]

How about if we return this thread to its purpose ??

Our respective mental health issues cannot be addressed here.

And I NEVER wrote that UKR shouold submit - stop lying

What do you conceive it's purpose to be? If not that . . . Ukraine shall never submit?

Mental health, F off. Last refuge of a commie. F Russia and Holy M Russia and all your second hand, pathologically anti-Enlightenment, conditional, provisional, guilt-driven bull S.

Long live the rights of man. You don't know what I'm talking about, though you once gave your oath to uphold it. You just didn't understand WTF you were pledging yourself to you didn't know WTF you were doing, whose fault is that? How much of your live will you expend -- in vain -- to find someone, some F ing conspiracy -- to blame it on? What responsiblity do you take for the way forward?

How was it that you were led to this position?

[sandtown]

How was it that you were led to this position?

I attribute a good deal of it to sanity.

You may be manic/depressive - get help.

[Osborne Russell]

Rather, seek help yourself, pretend pacifist, dupe of Holy Mother Russia.

You've got the rest of the Union
to help you along.

You see, I know what pledged myself to . . . you don't. To kill and die for. What would you kill and die for? I can say, without reservation. What say you, soldier?

[Osborne Russell]

You know what the thing is with these people? They don't say what they are for.

Even if they know the implications: that they, and their comrades, shall kill and die for something, though they have F all of an idea what it is; they know this, because they already did it, once. So, they are pledging, to something, or nothing.

That, to which they pledged, was for something. Now, what are they for? If to say so isn't too tramautic to give a plain answer, for them, for a warrior. Or, do you disclaim the status? If not, then GTFOOH when speaking of what "warrior" means --

Do they abjure the oath, morally, or merely the beneficiary of their oath? To whom -- or what -- do they pledge, now?

[JayInOz]

Osborne there was a time when I understood a lot of what you had to say. I miss that. JayInOz

[Osborne Russell]

Osborne there was a time when I understood a lot of what you had to say. I miss that. JayInOz

Dude, just ask me.

[gypsie]

........submit

I disagree.
You persistently state that Ukraine should negotiate with Russia (always appearing to absolve Russia of any responsibility to stop).
Yet the conditions to even begin negotiations, from Russia, are that Ukraine submit.

Peerie Maa's excellent link to the analysis of the Minsk Accords clearly shows that Ukraines choice was to refuse to implement the Minsk Accords and maintain sovereignty, or, implementation and ultimately submit to Russia. You have criticised Ukraine for not implementing the accords.

"I NEVER said" - well, maybe not in so many words, but yes you did/do.
Though there is a chance you don't understand what you were saying.

Having annexed Crimea in March 2014, Russia launched a campaign of violent subversion in eastern and southern Ukraine. Using teams of insurgents (local activists and provocateurs from Russia itself), Russia tried to force Ukraine to ‘federalize’ its political system. The aim was to create pro-Moscow regimes in these regions that would, once reintegrated into Ukraine, enable Russia to control its neighbour from within.

[epoxyboy]

OR is in a verbose philosophical mood today .
I think the short version is that peace is worth fighting for, dying, killing even. And that you can't truly be "for peace" if you're not also prepared to fight tooth and nail for it, if that's what it takes. Without that commitment to put your money where your mouth is, you're just making noise.
A little more visceral than "speak softly and carry a big stick".

Pete

[dutchpp]

The ISW Russian offensive campaign assessment, February 6.
https://www.understandingwar.org/bac...ebruary-6-2023

Key Takeaways

• Ukrainian officials assess that Russian forces are preparing to launch a large-scale decisive offensive in eastern Ukraine in mid-to-late February.
• Select Russian nationalist voices continued to express skepticism toward Russia’s ability to launch a successful offensive past late February.
• German Chancellor Olaf Scholz undermined Russian President Vladimir Putin’s false narrative that the provision of German tanks to Ukraine threatens Russian security.
• Kremlin-appointed Russian and occupation officials continue to implement social benefit schemes that target children and teenagers in occupied areas of Ukraine to consolidate social control and integration of these territories into Russia.
• Russian President Vladimir Putin continues to open the door for further institutionalized corruption in Russia through legislative manipulations.
• The Kremlin continues to deny Wagner Group financier Yevgeny Prigozhin legitimacy and authority in Russia.
• Prigozhin’s appeal in the Russian nationalist information space may also be declining as he continues to overcompensate for the culmination of Wagner’s attack around Bakhmut.
• Failures of Western sanctions efforts against the provision of arms components to Iran have likely contributed to Russia’s ability to bypass Western sanctions to acquire combat drones through military cooperation with Iran.
• Russian forces likely made tactical gains northeast of Kupyansk between February 4 and February 6, and Russian sources claimed that Russian forces advanced west of previous positions on the Svatove-Kreminna line on February 5 and February 6.
• Ukrainian forces maintain positions in Bilohorivka in Luhansk Oblast as of February 6 despite Russian claims that Russian forces captured Bilohorivka on February 3.
• Russian forces continued ground attacks northeast and south of Bakhmut but still have not encircled the settlement as of February 6.
• Russian forces conducted limited ground attacks in the Avdiivka-Donetsk City area.
• Ukrainian forces continued limited attempts to cross the Dnipro River.
• Russian conventional and irregular forces may be increasingly struggling to recruit from Russian penal colonies due to high casualties among prior penal colony recruits.
• Russian forces continue to struggle with ethnic tensions and tensions between irregular forces.
• Russian officials and occupation authorities may be intensifying operational security to conceal new Russian force deployments in Donbas.

[JayInOz]

With all the talk about a delay of two to three months at least before more western weapons arrive on the battle field in Ukraine, I suppose Putins hand has been forced somewhat into trying to launch a new offensive before the Ukrainian position is strengthened. Perhaps the only difference between this and last February is that Russia has greatly depleted its available munitions and a large percentage of the experienced soldiers are now dead. This years mud will be the same as last. JayInOz

[George.]

When all ya gotz is a 'yammer', everything looks like a.....

...wail.

[Andrew Craig-Bennett]

Stefan Korshak today:

https://medium.com/@Stefan.Korshak/f...s-2c188ee745fe

[sandtown]

You persistently state that Ukraine should negotiate with Russia (always appearing to absolve Russia of any responsibility to stop)..

Lots of very well informed people are calling for negotiations. Why pick on me alone ??

I'll tell you why; it is because you are trying to shut down any sort of reasoned discussion on this thread.

[Canoez]

The finest people. From both sides. Right.

The only reasoned discussion on this thread is for how Ukraine will evict Russian invaders and secure their borders.

Until Russia is being defeated in the field, they will likely not negotiate - and even then in questionable faith.

[ERGR]

I don't think that any of Russia's neighbours expect them to honour an agreement unless they face the muzzle of a tank gun. I wonder why Finland never disarmed after the cold war, as most of Europe did, and Poland instead choose to increase their army....
/Erik

[sandtown]

The only reasoned discussion on this thread is for how Ukraine will evict Russian invaders and secure their borders. .

Sez whom ?? Y'all thought police ??

[Canoez]

Sez whom ?? Y'all thought police ??

Sez the Ukrainians. It is their country, their decision, and that is what they have announced their choice to be.

[WX]

Lots of very well informed people are calling for negotiations. Why pick on me alone ??

I'll tell you why; it is because you are trying to shut down any sort of reasoned discussion on this thread.

Once again, what would you consider a fair deal for Ukraine if they decided to negotiate a cease-fire?

[sandtown]

Sez the Ukrainians. It is their country, their decision, and that is what they have announced their choice to be.

In this tragic conflict, the people of Ukr are divided.