I agree 100% with what President @ZelenskyyUa stated again.
There can be no discussion, let alone negotiation, with Putin's #Russia until its forces are driven out of the entire #Donbass and #Crimea.
Some elements in this recap #thread.
1/11
1 First, any proposal by Putin in this sense is a ruse—he is stalling in #Ukraine and he knows it. He's trying to hold on to what he has, before replenishing his forces and going on the offensive again.
Let's not give in.
2/11 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/we-must-save…
2 Given the massive crimes against humanity committed in Ukraine by Putin, accepting negotiations would implicitly mean wiping the slate clean on these imprescriptible crimes.
This is Putin's goal—we gave in to #Syria. Let's not do it for #Ukraine.
3/11 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/russian-mass…
3 Accepting that Moscow retains control over the territories conquered since 2014 would lead to an even greater increase in persecution of Ukrainians in these regions (and, in the case of Crimea, also of Tatars).
This would be to authorize the continuation of the crime.
4/11
4 What some call a half-defeat for Putin would be a defeat not only for Ukraine, but also for democracies and international law.
Putin has always wanted (Chechnya, Syria, Georgia) to show that the West is not serious about international law.
Let's not prove him right again.
5/11
5 The Ukrainian people have understood this and are asking their president and government, in their immense majority, to continue the fight until complete victory. Their will is clear.
Not only their authorities, but also we in the West, must comply with it.
6/11
6 For too long—and this was the fault of some EU countries, but also partly of the US—before February 2022 and afterwards, we pushed for negotiations and concessions.
This policy was a mistake; today it would be a betrayal.
7/11 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/why-the-west…
7 Those who would still push in this direction must be considered accomplices of the Kremlin—the propagandists are on this line, who demand that we do not arm #Ukraine.
They are enemies of the EU & the free world.
For them the law and the punishment of crimes don't matter.
8/11
8 The first conclusion of this is of course that—I will repeat it to the end—we must arm #Ukraine so that it can as soon as possible reclaim all these territories. We have to do it massively: every Ukrainian life counts.
Let's not trivialize the murders committed by #Russia.
9/11
9 The 2d conclusion is: radically defeating this regime would have happy consequences for our security in the West & for the peoples oppressed by Putin's allies (#Syria, #Belarus, #Burma)
It would also have virtuous implications for #Georgia, #Serbia, #CentralAsia, #Africa.
10/11
10 Western leaders must make clear that their war aim is this defeat of the Russian regime.
This is also what🇷🇺dissidents who are fighting this crime-ridden regime want.
Let them stop being afraid & be strategically responsible
Look at the long history, far beyond Ukraine.
11/11
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
We are at a decisive moment where #Ukraine can win. It must. I can't imagine any decent person thinking otherwise.
This means that Putin's regime must be defeated radically, totally, as I had expressed here. 2/6 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/we-must-save…
Western leaders must have total clarity on our war aims: #Russia must be defeated, for #Ukraine, because more crimes against humanity are intolerable, unacceptable, and for the world. This is a responsibility before history, eminent among all. 3/6 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/russian-mass…
Peskov, Putin's spokesman, denied the existence of any #agreement on "de-escalation" (I repeat, not a goal in itself) nor anything in terms otherwise contemptuous of France.
This was totally predictable.
Quick #Thread #Russia 1/6 theguardian.com/world/2022/feb…
1 There could be no agreement, and indeed I would have been somewhat concerned if there had been. It would have meant that @EmmanuelMacron would have accepted concessions. He didn't actually.
But there cannot and should not be any, not now, not later. 2/6 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/why-the-west…
2 There was talk of "commitment" - just vague commitment to continue the discussions. Nothing more. No commitment not to attack #Ukraine, one way or another, no commitment by Moscow to implement the Minsk agreements (not really).
Moscow will continue. 3/6 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/fogs-of-war-…
I note with concern that this interview of @EmmanuelMacron with @leJDD raises a lot of concerns, not unfounded, among our Allies.
I also wonder if it was entirely appropriate on the eve of a discussion with Vladimir Putin. #Thread 1/8 lejdd.fr/International/…
1 First, on the process, was it appropriate to publicly state his positions? Is it not, unintentionally of course, giving the enemy an advantage? This is also a problem of diplomatic #communication.
Something that I stresed here. 2/8 tenzerstrategics.substack.com/p/how-well-can…
2 Secondly, while our Allies remain distrustful & suspicious, this text risks increasing their distrust & thus the division of the EU on this subject. This may increase our fragility. It would have been wise to give the opposite signal.
My @cepa piece. 3/8 cepa.org/does-france-ha…
The court ruled that my comments "are part of a value judgment fed by the research of the author of the message (...) in a recurrent polemic relating to the editorial dependence (...) of the channel (...) on the Kremlin".
2/8
The Court also ruled that "the accused author must be able to express himself all the more freely as his analysis is at the heart of the mechanism of freedom of expression, whose limits are not exceeded in this case." #Freedomofexpression
3/8
Le tribunal a notamment jugé que mes propos "s'incrivent dans un jugement de valeur nourri par les recherches de l'auteur du message s'inscrivant (...) dans une polémique récurrente relative à la dépendance éditoriale (...) de la chaîne (...) envers le Kremlin". 2/8
Il a aussi jugé que "l'auteur incriminé doit pouvoir s'exprimer d'autant plus librement que son analyse se situe au coeur du mécanisme de la liberté d'expression, dont les limites ne sont nullement dépassées en l'espèce". #Libertédexpression 3/8
Merci (sincèrement) pour vos remarques. Certaines me paraissent fondées ; d'autres méritent d'être discutées ; d'autres ne correspondent pas à ce qui a été écrit dans @DeskRussie (pas par moi au demeurant et le directeur de la publication ne relit pas tout avant parution).
1/14
Sur le think tank influent, oui je pense que c'est une erreur que de l'avoir écrit - dont acte.
Sur certains passages critiqués (appel à l'armée russe), j'ai compris cela comme du second degré.
L'article de @DeskRussie ne dit pas que le type en question serait LE candidat... 2/14
Je précise que @DeskRussie n'est pas #RussiaToday ou #Sputnik à l'envers : il n'y a pas de système de contrôle de "conformité" au-delà d'un minimum (v. infra). Nous avons des points de vue souvent différents et parfois des oppositions entre nous. C'est normal et souhaitable.
3/14