Returning to this peace deal thread as Pres Zelensky gave a very interesting interview to Russian media in which he touched explicitly or implicitly on all the key points (except reparations).
Accepts some form of neutrality, though with security guarantees. So no NATO but (implicitly) no block on Ukraine joining EU.
Wants ceasefire and withdrawal to Feb 24 line.
Big concession is that he is not demanding return of Crimea or Donetsk/Luhansk. He however would not accept any deal unless it was accepted by the Ukrainian legislature.
Does leave the notty question of reparations. How about something where the EU and US cover most of the costs, as part of bringing Ukraine into the EU?
Overall, this seems to me a pretty sensible deal that would end this war.
btw, there was nothing in Zelensky's interview discussing a Ukrainian acceptance of demilitarization, so that was (and should) be off the table for Ukraine. Ukrainian armed forces have shown themselves to be the greatest pillar of his bargaining position as it is.
Reparations issue causing some disagreement. Two things to consider. 1) Think of the EU/US doing something like the Marshall Plan for Ukraine. 2) If in paying, they set the stage for Ukraine to join the EU, thats a big win for stability which will pay large economic dividends
Some complaint also that this deal leaves Putin in power. If so, and Ukraine accepts it, that is a price that would have to be paid. Ukraine is the actor here and it will set its own terms. Non-combatants should accept that.
A take worth reading about why Russia needs to take the lead in De-Putinizing itself regardless. theguardian.com/commentisfree/…
Every time this is discussed, the same basic split emerges. One side says this peace is far too pro-Ukraine and Russia will never agree. The other says it makes far too many concessions to Russia and Ukraine should keep fighting.
The possible no to NATO yes to EU deal for Ukraine is getting more and more play. Know its not ideal but think its a very strong way forward for Ukraine and would provide some real security as well.
Will add a little here about what I mean about security. If this kind of deal happens, a few things kick in. 1) if in the future Russia rebuilds its military and thinks about attacking Ukraine again, it will not be invading Ukraine, it will be invading the European Union.
That distinction matters (not only because the EU might have a greater security apparatus. The EU would either have to take extreme measures to defend Ukraine or the whole edifice falls apart. And the EU likes to save itself.
NATO can still work very closely to prepare the Ukrainian military--as it has only more so. Making any invasion even more difficult to consider.
Finally, Ukraine could have other, better security relationships with third party countries.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
An article that outlines what Russia might be facing in terms of personnel--too few soldiers at hand to reinforce their efforts in Ukraine quickly. Helps put its finger on the heart of the dilemma facing Putin. nationalinterest.org/blog/buzz/russ…
Having deployed 75% of his best combat troops (BTGs) and maybe 70% of all Russian military power to the stalled invasion, what is left to deploy would certainly not be enough to take Kyiv.(And it must be remembered would basically leave Russia defenceless everywhere else)
It might be enough to try and occupy much of Donetsk-Luhansk, but that would be it. And at that point the Russian army would have been fully deployed. Thats the fundamental reason time is on Ukraine's side.
This might be counter-intuitive, but the mediocre (to be kind) performance of the Russian military in Kyiv means that Europe and the USA do not need to rush out and spend billions more right away on their militaries. It means they have a window to plan for the future.
They should do this properly. Learn the lessons of this conflict, not waste money on systems that could be of questionable value (tanks?), and take advantage of the significant security window Russia is giving them.
There are a number of fundamental questions that need to be analyzed before we rush off to spend billions and billions. Even before looking at the war we need to start with these two:
First Battle of Kyiv looks to be truly over. That is actually momentous. Whatever happens now we are talking about a limited war time and geography-wise--unless we think Russia has the will and resources to conscript, train and arm an entirely new army.
If the Russians are pulling back from Kyiv (which looks likely), coming back will be very very hard without basically societal mobilization. They will probably divert all remaining combat worthy forces to try and consolidate Donbass and East.
Worth noting that this also means Russia is dropping its plan for Odessa--unless something remarkable happens.
New stories that Russia will have to accept Ukraine in the EU if Ukraine stays out of NATO. I hope people understand that if this happens, its a major victory for Ukraine.
There are alot of people saying--but the EU wont let Ukraine in right away. In a pre-Feb 24 world Im sure they are right. However, I wonder if we are underestimating the impact of Feb 24 on Europe. The EU always hedged on Ukraine because they safely knew Russia objected
If the EU turns around now, after what the Ukrainians have sacrificed for the right to join the EU and says no to membership--it will seem extraordinarily petty and a rejection of everything that the EU should stand for.
A thought thread on the most remarkable thing of the war--here we are more than a month in this, and the Ukrainians are openly transporting equipment on major roads under clear blue skies. This represents an almost total failure of Russian airpower.
And as this is a captured Russian piece of equipment, it would have to be relatively close to the place of capture, so we are talking near the war zone.
This cuts both ways, there are pictures of Russian columns operating in the open in clear skies--yes they can get attacked but they can also operate much of the time.
Weirdest story of the day. Which makes most sense. 1) someone in Abramovich's entourage poisoned everyone and got his boss (by accident?) 2) Abramovich tried to poison the Ukrainians and got himself too. 3) Russian intelligence poisoned their own delegation to get the Ukrainians.
Has Abramovich been back in Russia since then? Maybe it was an attempt on him. I remember he flew to Istanbul a while ago. What a strange, strange story.
Reuters reporting it was environmental factors, so the great mystery is maybe not so mysterious.