Russia - Ukraine “peace negotiations”

[nycfan]

How Russia’s Call for Peace Talks Turned Into a Diplomatic Defeat for Putin​

Germany, France, the U.K. and Poland outmaneuvered Putin by persuading Ukraine’s Zelensky to accept Trump’s cease-fire demand; Russia’s leader balked​

—> https://www.wsj.com/world/russia-pu...9b?st=ryyAi7&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

——
Let’s face it though, the only person who needs convincing is Trump and hard to see how anything changes his weird love of Putin.

 

[nycfan]

 

[BlueSmoke]

"weird love of Putin".

Well, understandable love of Putin. A conman like Trump, has no need for the rest of us. We're his victims. He uses the spoils he gets from his victims to trade with other corrupt people like Putin and Middle Eastern leaders to enrich himself.

 

[nycfan]

 

[nycfan]

 

[BlueSmoke]

Russian casualty numbers seem to be trending down. Hoping this is a sign that the Russian war effort is running out of steam. Kinda think Putin doesn't know how to get out of this war with something he can call a victory. So he is demanding that Trump hand him a victory or Putin won't play with Trump. Trouble with that is that all Trump can do is a ceasefire. Needs Ukraine to corporate for anything more.

Any kind of ceasefire might be a disaster for Putin. It's a very long border. No way Putin could maintain his restless and criminal army guarding it for any activity by Ukraine.

Putin and Trump are trying to dance together on this. But they are out of step with each other and the Ukrainian music.

 

[nycfan]

 

[Batt Boy]

List of Russian demands (Bloomberg published them, probably other sources as well) for cease fire/peace:

1. Ukraine must adopt a neutral status without the presence of foreign troops or weapons of mass destruction on its territory.

2. Kiev must renounce its demands for reparations from Moscow.

3. Ukraine must come to terms with the loss of Crimea and four other regions.

4. Putin will agree to a ceasefire only after Ukraine withdraws its troops from these regions.

5. The Kremlin wants all five regions to be recognized as Russian at the international level.

Ukrainian and Western press are already calling them hard line however I see a lot to work with here. First and second demand are standard and should have been expected. NATO expansion is probably the reason this whole thing started and the victor doesn't pay war reparations, this is standard practice. Third, fourth and fifth demand are basically the same, recognizing Crimea plus 4 regions as Russian. This is also expected, however there could be wiggle room here for negotiations.

If I were advising Ukraine, I would propose Ukraine keep city of Kherson and all the land on its side of the Dnieper river as well as Zaporozhye city proper and the land west of it (relinquishing the rest of Zaporozhye to Russia) while on the other hand offering lands in Dnieper Petrovsk (scarcely populated although territorialy significant) and Kharkov region (probably the city of Kupyansk and land to the Oskil river making it a border). This way Ukraine keeps Dnieper as its border and keeps major population centers under its control while Russia gains more land than it would previously including the hard fought regions around Kupyansk any Lyman.

Whether anyone likes it or not Russia is going to expand its territory and even according to Ukrainians there is a major summer offensive coming after which we could be speaking about Crimea plus six regions so Ukraine needs to negotiate now and get a better deal than it would be towards the end of the year.

Noticeably absent are Russia's demand for denazification and demilitarization. The first is Russia's signal that it would not have any say in future Ukrainian government (Zelensky can stay in power). This is an olive branch to Zelensky, and the second allows Ukraine to have as much troops and equipment as it wants/can get, placing no restrictions on them (apart from WMD), which is an olive branch to Ukrainian right wing hardliners.

Overall, even if it looks harsh on the first glance, there is much to work with here, nobody should expect the terms after three years of war to be mild.

 

[nycfan]

 

[nycfan]

Trump Sounds Upbeat on Ukraine Cease-Fire as Russia Unleashes Drone Barrage​

Putin has delayed and slow-rolled talks as U.S. president pushes for a quick peace deal​

—> https://www.wsj.com/world/trump-sou...b7?st=niXs7S&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

“… Putin’s handling of Trump in the first months of his presidency has turned into a study of just how far the Russian president can test the U.S. president’s patience as he frustrates Trump’s campaign promise of brokering a quick end to the war in Ukraine. While Trump has at times expressed annoyance at Putin, he so far has balked at deploying more economic sanctions against Russia.

Talks on Friday between Kyiv and Moscow representatives in Istanbul delivered little progress and showed that Putin is sticking to his maximalist demands in the war: achieving a weakened Ukraine dominated by Moscow. Russia rejected the demand by Kyiv and its allies to have a cease-fire in place before negotiating a long-term peace.

At the same time, the Trump administration can now say that Russia and Ukraine are at least engaging in negotiations. In his comments Sunday, Rubio said the talks “were not a complete waste of time” because they prompted an exchange of prisoners between Russia and Ukraine, and that proposals for a cease-fire could soon lead to broader negotiations.

…
Since his election, Trump’s interactions with the Kremlin have allowed him to claim incipient progress but no peace deal. After a phone call with Putin in February, the U.S. and Russia announced the opening of talks in Saudi Arabia led on the U.S. side by Trump’s close personal friend, Steve Witkoff, whom he appointed as special envoy. Talks have been inconclusive but provoked tensions with European allies and Ukraine, who worried that Trump was cutting a peace deal with the Kremlin without their input.

After another phone call in March, Trump announced that Putin agreed to a partial cease-fire against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. But the cease-fire never stuck, and Moscow was resistant to any wider truce.

The Kremlin all the while has been appealing to Trump’s commercial instincts by touting the economic rewards of normalizing relations between the U.S. and Russia.

Witkoff has traveled to Russia and met four times with Putin, coming out of talks echoing the Kremlin’s talking points about the origins of the war in Ukraine. …”

 

[nycfan]

Trump Sounds Upbeat on Ukraine Cease-Fire as Russia Unleashes Drone Barrage​

Putin has delayed and slow-rolled talks as U.S. president pushes for a quick peace deal​

—> https://www.wsj.com/world/trump-sou...b7?st=niXs7S&reflink=mobilewebshare_permalink

“… Putin’s handling of Trump in the first months of his presidency has turned into a study of just how far the Russian president can test the U.S. president’s patience as he frustrates Trump’s campaign promise of brokering a quick end to the war in Ukraine. While Trump has at times expressed annoyance at Putin, he so far has balked at deploying more economic sanctions against Russia.

Talks on Friday between Kyiv and Moscow representatives in Istanbul delivered little progress and showed that Putin is sticking to his maximalist demands in the war: achieving a weakened Ukraine dominated by Moscow. Russia rejected the demand by Kyiv and its allies to have a cease-fire in place before negotiating a long-term peace.

At the same time, the Trump administration can now say that Russia and Ukraine are at least engaging in negotiations. In his comments Sunday, Rubio said the talks “were not a complete waste of time” because they prompted an exchange of prisoners between Russia and Ukraine, and that proposals for a cease-fire could soon lead to broader negotiations.

…
Since his election, Trump’s interactions with the Kremlin have allowed him to claim incipient progress but no peace deal. After a phone call with Putin in February, the U.S. and Russia announced the opening of talks in Saudi Arabia led on the U.S. side by Trump’s close personal friend, Steve Witkoff, whom he appointed as special envoy. Talks have been inconclusive but provoked tensions with European allies and Ukraine, who worried that Trump was cutting a peace deal with the Kremlin without their input.

After another phone call in March, Trump announced that Putin agreed to a partial cease-fire against Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. But the cease-fire never stuck, and Moscow was resistant to any wider truce.

The Kremlin all the while has been appealing to Trump’s commercial instincts by touting the economic rewards of normalizing relations between the U.S. and Russia.

Witkoff has traveled to Russia and met four times with Putin, coming out of talks echoing the Kremlin’s talking points about the origins of the war in Ukraine. …”

“…
Russia also continues to insist on eliminating the “root causes” of the conflict, Kremlin shorthand for Kyiv’s existence as a sovereign state and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization’s expansion in the former Eastern bloc. Putin’s envoy in Istanbul, Vladimir Medinsky, explicitly framed the talks as a continuation of the early 2022 negotiations in the same city, where Russia’s demands were effectively a call for Ukraine’s capitulation. Medinsky, a former culture minister, invoked historical parallels to indicate that Moscow is ready for a prolonged war.

Hours after the Istanbul meeting, a Russian drone struck a bus in the northeastern Ukrainian region of Sumy, killing nine people and injuring four.

In Kyiv, the air-raid alert sirens began wailing again around midnight on Saturday night. The attack continued for nine hours, until authorities gave the all-clear at 8:54 a.m. Sunday. The bombardment killed a 27-year-old woman and shattered windows and damaged buildings across the capital, authorities said.

…At the same time, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R., S.C.), a close ally of Trump, is forging ahead on a plan to impose steep tariffs on countries that buy Russian oil, gas and uranium, potentially putting pressure on Moscow’s most important revenue stream.

Any new penalties would come at a difficult time for the Russian economy. After weathering Western sanctions throughout the conflict by shifting the economy to a war footing and relying on ample oil exports, Moscow is now facing an abrupt slowdown.

Economic growth slowed sharply in the first quarter of the year to 1.4% year-over-year from 4.5% in the previous quarter as high interest rates, persistent inflation and deep-seated labor shortages weigh on businesses and consumers. Low oil prices in recent months, meanwhile, have hit the Kremlin’s state coffers where oil and gas make up around a third of revenues.

“A potential economic deal with Trump is important for Russia because Putin’s old energy model is not bringing enough money into the budget and Russia is sinking into stagflation,” Kolesnikov, the political analyst, said. “

 

[lawtig02]

List of Russian demands (Bloomberg published them, probably other sources as well) for cease fire/peace:

1. Ukraine must adopt a neutral status without the presence of foreign troops or weapons of mass destruction on its territory.

2. Kiev must renounce its demands for reparations from Moscow.

3. Ukraine must come to terms with the loss of Crimea and four other regions.

4. Putin will agree to a ceasefire only after Ukraine withdraws its troops from these regions.

5. The Kremlin wants all five regions to be recognized as Russian at the international level.

Ukrainian and Western press are already calling them hard line however I see a lot to work with here. First and second demand are standard and should have been expected. NATO expansion is probably the reason this whole thing started and the victor doesn't pay war reparations, this is standard practice. Third, fourth and fifth demand are basically the same, recognizing Crimea plus 4 regions as Russian. This is also expected, however there could be wiggle room here for negotiations.

If I were advising Ukraine, I would propose Ukraine keep city of Kherson and all the land on its side of the Dnieper river as well as Zaporozhye city proper and the land west of it (relinquishing the rest of Zaporozhye to Russia) while on the other hand offering lands in Dnieper Petrovsk (scarcely populated although territorialy significant) and Kharkov region (probably the city of Kupyansk and land to the Oskil river making it a border). This way Ukraine keeps Dnieper as its border and keeps major population centers under its control while Russia gains more land than it would previously including the hard fought regions around Kupyansk any Lyman.

Whether anyone likes it or not Russia is going to expand its territory and even according to Ukrainians there is a major summer offensive coming after which we could be speaking about Crimea plus six regions so Ukraine needs to negotiate now and get a better deal than it would be towards the end of the year.

Noticeably absent are Russia's demand for denazification and demilitarization. The first is Russia's signal that it would not have any say in future Ukrainian government (Zelensky can stay in power). This is an olive branch to Zelensky, and the second allows Ukraine to have as much troops and equipment as it wants/can get, placing no restrictions on them (apart from WMD), which is an olive branch to Ukrainian right wing hardliners.

Overall, even if it looks harsh on the first glance, there is much to work with here, nobody should expect the terms after three years of war to be mild.

These terms, even as you’re modifying them, are what one would expect after a complete victory on the ground by Russia, not as a compromise resolution to a stalemate. Russia’s victory is not inevitable unless Trump hands it to them. There’s no way to spin this — any outcome endorsed by Trump will be a massive gift to Russia and a massive betrayal of Ukraine.

 

[superrific]

These terms, even as you’re modifying them, are what one would expect after a complete victory on the ground by Russia, not as a compromise resolution to a stalemate. Russia’s victory is not inevitable unless Trump hands it to them. There’s no way to spin this — any outcome endorsed by Trump will be a massive gift to Russia and a massive betrayal of Ukraine.

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out what Batt does for a living that would make him so knowledgeable about how these terms are actually not bad. They surely seem bad to me. I'm no foreign service diplomat, but I know a little bit about history. And what I know in history is that stalemate wars often end up with foreign troops present in the aftermath.

The Korean armistice, of course, did not prevent the US or China from stationing troops in their respective client states. The Iran/Iraq war included no such provision. I don't think Israel's treaties have included such clauses (Egypt agreed not to host foreign military bases on Sinai, which is very far short of what Russia is asking). It's a wild demand that no country would agree to except under special circumstances. Such as Austria in the 1950s, who pledged to be neutral but they were well aware that the West would push back on any Soviet aggression.

As for reparations, once Trump is out of office Russia will pay for them one way or another. Unless he unfreezes Russian oligarch money and convinced Europe to do the same.

 

[lawtig02]

Yeah, I'm trying to figure out what Batt does for a living that would make him so knowledgeable about how these terms are actually not bad. They surely seem bad to me. I'm no foreign service diplomat, but I know a little bit about history. And what I know in history is that stalemate wars often end up with foreign troops present in the aftermath.

The Korean armistice, of course, did not prevent the US or China from stationing troops in their respective client states. The Iran/Iraq war included no such provision. I don't think Israel's treaties have included such clauses (Egypt agreed not to host foreign military bases on Sinai, which is very far short of what Russia is asking). It's a wild demand that no country would agree to except under special circumstances. Such as Austria in the 1950s, who pledged to be neutral but they were well aware that the West would push back on any Soviet aggression.

As for reparations, once Trump is out of office Russia will pay for them one way or another. Unless he unfreezes Russian oligarch money and convinced Europe to do the same.

Right. The most I could see as acceptable, starting from those terms, would be:

1. Russia gets Crimea and maybe Donbas (not Kherson), but renounces any claim to any other former Soviet territory.

2. Either both sides commit to complete global neutrality, or Ukraine is allowed to join any alliance it chooses.

3. No express reparations but all frozen Russian assets are conveyed to Ukraine.

4. Sanctions on Russia are scaled down over 4-5 years, subject to Russia maintaining neutrality in all international affairs.

 

[lawtig02]

Right. The most I could see as acceptable, starting from those terms, would be:

1. Russia gets Crimea and maybe Donbas (not Kherson), but renounces any claim to any other former Soviet territory.

2. Either both sides commit to complete global neutrality, or Ukraine is allowed to join any alliance it chooses.

3. No express reparations but all frozen Russian assets are conveyed to Ukraine.

4. Sanctions on Russia are scaled down over 4-5 years, subject to Russia maintaining neutrality in all international affairs.

Oh, and Russia cannot interfere with Ukraine’s waterflow or Black Sea access.

 

[Batt Boy]

These terms, even as you’re modifying them, are what one would expect after a complete victory on the ground by Russia, not as a compromise resolution to a stalemate. Russia’s victory is not inevitable unless Trump hands it to them. There’s no way to spin this — any outcome endorsed by Trump will be a massive gift to Russia and a massive betrayal of Ukraine.

Agree completely on Trump. The problem is, the agenda is being driven by Vlad, aided by Trump. I don't like it one bit, but the reality on the ground is very bad for the UA. I hope I am wrong.

 

[superrific]

Right. The most I could see as acceptable, starting from those terms, would be:

1. Russia gets Crimea and maybe Donbas (not Kherson), but renounces any claim to any other former Soviet territory.

2. Either both sides commit to complete global neutrality, or Ukraine is allowed to join any alliance it chooses.

3. No express reparations but all frozen Russian assets are conveyed to Ukraine.

4. Sanctions on Russia are scaled down over 4-5 years, subject to Russia maintaining neutrality in all international affairs.

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think neutrality makes sense for Russia. It's still one of the poles. It's like asking the Soviet Union to stay neutral. Or one of two basketball teams to stay neutral. I mean, the major conflict in global geopolitics is still between the West and the communist or post-communist east.

Otherwise, I agree with you. I would rephrase your last point as Russia foregoing any aggression or plans to increase their capability for aggression.

 

[lawtig02]

Agree completely on Trump. The problem is, the agenda is being driven by Vlad, aided by Trump. I don't like it one bit, but the reality on the ground is very bad for the UA. I hope I am wrong.

I think it’s bad for both of them. The difference is Vlad has Trump on his side and Zelenskyy does not.

 

[lawtig02]

I see where you're coming from, but I don't think neutrality makes sense for Russia. It's still one of the poles. It's like asking the Soviet Union to stay neutral. Or one of two basketball teams to stay neutral. I mean, the major conflict in global geopolitics is still between the West and the communist or post-communist east.

Otherwise, I agree with you. I would rephrase your last point as Russia foregoing any aggression or plans to increase their capability for aggression.

I agree. But if Russia won’t commit to neutrality, Ukraine shouldn’t be required to either. My point was it should be both or neither.

 

[superrific]

I agree. But if Russia won’t commit to neutrality, Ukraine shouldn’t be required to either. My point was it should be both or neither.

Which is like saying neither. It's basically like that old logic table: If X & Y, and X is false, then it's just Y