Only Trump’s second day as president-elect, and his reported plan to “freeze” the conflict in Ukraine is already facing pushback from Moscow. Signals from Putin’s circle suggest outright rejection—a clear sign of how difficult Trump’s dealings with Putin will be 1/
So, what is Trump's plan? Nobody knows! But the Wall Street Journal reports on multiple versions of different advisors. All proposals will freeze the war. But some are more damaging to Ukraine than others 2/ wsj.com/world/trump-pr…
One proposal is to commit Ukraine to abandon NATO for 20 years, in exchange for the U.S. pumping Ukraine full of weapons to deter a future Russian attack.
Is it realistic? I don't think so. Can the US commit to give enough weapons? Can Zelensky violate Ukraine's Constitution?3/
WSJ: Under that plan, the front line would lock [including Kursk?] and both sides would agree to an 800-mile demilitarized zone. Who would police that territory? Unclear, but not the US or UN.
So, this plan is more of a fantasy ... than a realistic proposal 4/
Another plan is to withhold weapons from Ukraine until Kyiv agrees to peace talks with Russia. Ukraine could still try to regain lost territory, but would have to do so through diplomatic negotiations.
How would it work? Why would Russia agree to stop the war? Nobody knows! 5/
Dmitriy Trenin, a former direct of Carnegie - Moscow, gives a pretty clear response from Russia to these proposals:
This is not good enough! Russia will reject them and demand control over UA govt, military capabilities and security alliances 6/
What does it mean? At this point it is nothing more than rhetoric. Russians are arguing for more. The Trump administration people, though, might be attempting to push Europe to step up Ukraine support now in fear of Trump abandoning Ukraine next January. Which is smart 7X
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
A Ukrainian soldier’s deeply personal experience of war and learning to return home
WE ALL STAY HERE…
No one comes back from here. Ever.
The family only receives a tragic semblance of their son, husband, father—an aggressive beast. 1/
They see a creature, bitter at the world, who believes in nothing but death. Someone who flares up at a single word, who curses the world, and is ready to lash out at anyone who “looks the wrong way.” 2/
Yesterday’s soldier, sergeant, captain no longer belongs to parents or family. He belongs to her… he belongs to the war, from which only his body or what’s left of it has returned.3/
Putin congratulates Trump and outlines his terms for peace talks (talks, not agreement!): Ukrainian neutrality for 20 years, territory annexation accepted and recognized, de fact Ukraine surrender. This is his rhetoric: 1/
Putin: “We have always recognized Ukraine's borders as part of our agreements [about neutrality] after the collapse of the USSR.”
Translation: No neutrality, no international borders But: this is an excuse, as Crimea was annexed when Ukraine was neutral 2/
Putin: The Ukrainian government has amended the basic law on the desire to join NATO - but we didn't agree on that. We never and nowhere support coups d'état
Translation: We control Ukraine’s foreign policy and who Ukrainians elect 3/
I can't sleep. Every night this past month, Russian drones are over Kyiv, often just outside my window that I wake up to their buzzing. In a new, twisted upgrade, they’re now armed with thermobarics—fire clouds that burn up all the air, and people, in any space they hit 1/
These drones basically randomly hit something on their way, sometimes an apartment, sometimes an office, sometimes even a playground. That happens both at night and during the day. Air alerts are non stop 2/
On my drive to work every day, I see air defense machine guns out in the open—stationed on roadsides, near rivers, and in parks. Dozens. Sometimes they shoot while traffic is driving around them. All of this has become ridiculously mundane 3/
Ksenia Yudaeva, sanctioned by the US, is appointed as IMF executive director for Russia and Syria (!). US Treasury declines to comment on sanctions implications for Yudaeva's ability to serve and the IMF’s reputation. Instead, an IMF spokesperson emphasizes directors' duty to fund's interests 1/
The Russian Central Bank governor Nabiullina credits Yudaeva with helping maintain Russian financial stability. I guess she means Yudayeva has done a fantastic job helping fund the war in Ukraine 2/
With this appointment, the IMF shows it is willing to overlook human rights abuses and international law. The fund prioritizes “stability” and “partnership” over justice, but in reality I think it is nothing but complicity in Russian crimes 3/
"Trump will try to create some kind of deal to end the war"
My conversation with BBC earlier today.
Q: What are your thoughts on Mr. Trump's return to the White House?
A: That's a new reality. The question is not what will happen, but what Ukraine and everyone else can do to adapt to this new reality. 1/
And we see that Zelenskyy administration himself, moved quickly. Now, they are not talking about what Ukraine needs but about what Trump can benefit from by dealing with Ukraine. 2/
Q: Do you believe that he will put sanctions on Russia?
A: I think Trump will use sanctions as leverage for negotiation. So Trump might cancel sanctions, but only in exchange for something.
He won't do it simply because he says he has a good relationship with Putin. So no, I think Trump will use sanctions strategically. 3/
Ukrainians are as polarized as Americans are about the U.S. election
My conversation with CNN earlier today.
Q: How interested are Ukrainians in the upcoming U.S. elections?
A: Extremely interested. 1/
Ukrainians understand that our future is significantly influenced by what happens in the United States. U.S. leadership is critical, and there's a clear difference between the candidates. We're as polarized about the U.S. election as Americans are. 2/
Q: Why would any Ukrainians support a Trump presidency that might cut off aid to Ukraine?
A: It's intriguing, but some Ukrainians believe that a deal—whatever it might be—could be better than continuing the war of attrition. They assume, perhaps incorrectly, that such a deal might be favorable for Ukraine. 3/