As preparations for the next phase of the Russo-Ukrainian war are underway, there is an ongoing discussion about the new shape of the security architecture in Europe. Inevitably, in addition to constructive ideas, threatening concepts are also emerging, which aim to hand Russia a… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
But let us begin by saying that Ukraine's victory over Russia must not be viewed as an end in itself. Russia seeks to change the security architecture in Europe by force—a method prohibited by international law. Ukraine is defending this architecture with the support of states… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Several countries made the strategic mistake of underestimating Russia’s determination to achieve the revision of Europe's security architecture by force. The result was the Russian invasion of Ukraine. The lesson should guide us on how to deal with Russia in the future and what… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
For Russia, aggression against Ukraine is not only a means to subjugate this country but to force the establishment of an order in Europe based on the logic of spheres of influence. And let there be no doubt in anyone's mind. Russia claims its right to determine the borders of… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
In the ongoing debate about the political goals the free world should pursue in supporting Ukraine in repelling Russian aggression, some participants have forgotten Russia's goals and what Ukraine and its non-aligned allies are defending. Hence the ideas of freezing the conflict… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
For example, US analysts Richard Haass and Charles Kupchan of @CFR_org stress in their @ForeignAffairs piece that there shouldn’t be a formal recognition of the line of control between RUS and Ukrainian troops. However, the status of the land and people under Russian occupation… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
But there are also proposals for more clearly defined lines. Some UK Foreign Office clerks apparently would like to leave Russia in control of Crimea or put its future to an internationally recognised referendum. BTW, they propose a departure from the clear and admirable policy… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
As for the proposal to freeze the conflict, since our goal is to deny Russia the opportunity for another aggression, our fresh experience suggests that freezing the conflict is not a solution. It only gives Russia time to prepare for another aggression and pursue its political… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
The only off-ramp Russia can get is by stopping to try off-map its neighbours. Any attempts to freeze the conflict will only favour Russia and boost its determination to fight the wars. President @ZelenskyyUa knows this very well. He is, undoubtedly, the most experienced… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
This is not a war of territorial conquest. This war was started and is waged ruthlessly because Russia refuses to recognise Ukraine’s right to exist as a sovereign nation within its internationally recognised borders. You may rightly dismiss Vladimir Putin’s pretentious… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Russia is a master at drawing lines on the map. So what the first commandment of Russian policy is? Draw no lines with the Russians! 1918 Treaty of Brest-Litovsk, Ribbentrop-Molotov Pact of 1939, Yalta in 1945 and Minsk Agreements clearly show that drawing lines does not bring… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
So in aiming to include Ukraine in a much better security system than the one offered to it in the framework of the Budapest Memorandum of 1994 and the NATO Summit in Bucharest, as well as in the Minsk Agreements, we must remember that it must be complementary to the NATO-based… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
Ukraine's interim security system must be treated as a mechanism for strengthening Ukraine's defence capabilities and determination to repel Russian aggression. It ultimately should serve the primary purpose, depriving Russia of the chance to resort to force again. They should… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
APPENDIX I👇👇👇
"This dangerous view of the future, therefore, not only draws questionable lessons from history but also manifests itself in cautious hedging that fails to learn from the Zeitenwende. It would be far better for Scholz to commit unequivocally to a Ukrainian… twitter.com/i/web/status/1…
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
This is an interesting observation. A reminder of a fact that was once self-evident. There is no universal model of a democratic system. Each democratic state has developed its institutions and procedures in the course of a long historical process and in a sovereign manner. 1/
In the former Eastern Bloc countries, the French constitutional provision, allowing universally binding law to be changed without parliamentary approval, would’ve been considered incompatible with democracy. This is because this is how laws were often introduced by communists 2/
Could CE Europe claim therefore that democracy in France is failing? Nothing of the sort. The constitutional order in any democratic state is the result of the evolution of the social contract. It’s up to the French alone to judge whether their democracy meets expectations. 3/
A spokeswoman for the German government said few days ago that the German government' approval of the transfer of Leopard 2 tanks to Ukraine is essential.
And without it, arming Ukraine with Leopards would be ILLEGAL...
Few considerations on this 👇 1/
I was puzzled by this statement. There is undoubtedly a conflict of norms here. Contractual terms vs. international law. But I believe that a formalistic approach to contractual norms in this issue is unacceptable from the point of view of defending a rules-based order. 2/
Which is - BTW - a political objective declared by the same German government. 3/
As promised, here is a thread with the highlights of my conversation with @ElbridgeColby, followed by a link to full interview in the end of this thread.
Read first and then you can 👉 🥳🍾
A Happy New Year to all readers!
2/ @ElbridgeColby: "Russia has clearly weakened itself...I continue to think that the main actors in the global balance are the United States and China; then you have sort of the rising tertiary powers, like India, of course Japan is still there, the European Union as a whole”.
3/ @ElbridgeColby: “The notion that we would go back, as some are saying, including some leaders in Europe, to this notion of a Thomas Friedman-style borderless world idea is just delusional..."
Interesting thread. Sergey is right to point out the differences in approaches to Putin's Russia between the democratic CEE societies and Russian liberal opposition. I would distribute the accents differently though - the main difference lies in the different consitutencies.🧶
2/ Russian opposition wants to come to power in democratic way. The problem is that certain part of Russian society is made up of imperialists. Thus Russian liberals do not want to alienate them, so they avoid anti-imperialist rhetoric. But this is the red line for CEE democrats.
3/ Whether democracy precludes imperialism is a separate issue. In my opinion, well-established modern democracy basically precludes imperialist policies, or - at least - reduces such a risk. But does it in Russia? Can Russia be an established democracy in the near future?
Responding to Putin's nuclear threats against Ukraine, @jakejsullivan re-established deterrence by warning Russia of "catastrophic consequences". However, this message must be reinforced for deterrence to work. How? By sending ATACMS to Ukraine NOW!👉🧵
Let’s start with briefly looking at what ATACMS is: a surface-to-surface ballistic missile, deployed by US Army for last 30 years (fits MLRS & HIMARS launchers). And yes, it was operationally used in the first Gulf War in 1991!
👉asc.army.mil/web/portfolio-…
2/16
What ATACMS is clearly NOT: a strategic weapon.
It has a CONVENTIONAL warhead (can’t be ‘nuclearized’). It does not have enough RANGE to hit deep into Russia's territory (only 300km) and reach its strategic objects. 3/16
„Warum Warschau keine Reparationen von Moskau fordert?“
This single question is an example of not just hubris and insolent whataboutism, but also historical illiteracy. As a historian, I prefer to focus on the last part. Here we go. 1/7
Germany started the war. Germany lost it. It agreed to an unconditional surrender. The Soviet Union invaded Poland. The Soviets killed, looted and ethnically cleansed Poles and other Central European nations. 2/7
But the USSR landed in the opposite camp because Hitler decided to exit the de facto alliance with Stalin. 3/7