Thread by @CChivvis

🧵Many thanks to @theEconomist for the opportunity to lay out my thinking about why Western leaders ought to do more to bring the #UkraineRussiaWar to a negotiated close, even while continuing to support #Ukraine. 1/7

economist.com/by-invitation/…

As the war nears its one year anniversary, many have already died and millions are suffering. 2/7

bbc.com/news/world-eur…

I sympathize with Ukraine’s desire to fight on, but their maximalist war aims are unrealistic. They are unlikely to be achieved without an huge increase in support from the West, but the West lacks the vital interest that would justify this. 3/7

economist.com/by-invitation/…

Getting diplomacy going will require tough conversations to persuade Ukraine to adopt a more realistic approach to its war aims. Western leaders have the right and a responsibility to do this. 4/7

cnn.com/2022/09/08/pol…

Concern a negotiated settlement would “reward” Putin, and perhaps encourage Chinese aggression in #Taiwan, is overblown. If the negotiations froze the battlelines where they are now, Putin would have paid a very high price for very limited gains. 5/7

asia.nikkei.com/Opinion/Ukrain…

Talks also offer promise of post-conflict reconstruction. And that is where Ukraine’s true victory over Russia will lie: in becoming a vibrant #democracy well integrated into Europe. That process is already likely to last until the 2030s or beyond. 6/7

rand.org/pubs/monograph…

Diplomats would have to aim low at first, but even a temporary end to the fighting would offer a chance for emotions to cool, lives to be saved and resources spared. Another frozen conflict is better than the risks of a hot war for years to come. 7/7

carnegieendowment.org/2022/03/03/how…