advertisement


Ukraine III

Status
Not open for further replies.
NeilR said:
I don’t think Matthew is being argumentative or insulting. Maybe that is your interpretation of it, but I don’t think it reads that way and I don’t think he means it that way either.
Click to expand...

I can confirm that that was indeed my intention.
 
How do you go about negotiating with Putin?

He wants the east and the south of Ukraine. He doesn't want Ukraine to even exist. He wants Ukraine to promise never to join NATO (in the same way he promised never to invade Ukraine and wants Ukraine to demilitarise (presumably so that under the pretence of saving Russians he can march in again any time he likes and not be shot at this time.

That's not negotiating. That's capitulation.
 
NeilR said:
I don’t think Matthew is being argumentative or insulting. Maybe that is your interpretation of it, but I don’t think it reads that way and I don’t think he means it that way either.
Click to expand...
Well now Mathew has made his position clear we can take comfort in the fact he doesn't have a solution/negotiation position acceptable to both sides either and is, despite his contrarian posts, in fact just wailing against the inhumanity of it all with the rest of us.;-)
 
cooky1257 said:
... and indeed somewhat cynical as they can no longer get spare parts for the S300.
Click to expand...
Ukraine already have their own S-300 in armament, some extra will be helpful with or without new spare parts. Netherlands and Germany will replace them with Patriot for Slovakia.
 
Chaps...

For my own clarity of thought, may I attempt to summarize?

1) We all want peace, not war.

By we, I mean the vast majority of forum participants. We have very few Putin trolls and chickenhawks, but these are obvious exceptions.

2) All wars end in one of three ways.

Victory/surrender, negotiated peace or stalemate. Right now, it is impossible to say which will happen. I've said a couple of times that I fully expected Russia to besiege major cities and reduce them to rubble through bombing and missile strikes. It's what they did in Syria, and it's what they are doing again now. In fact, Syria really does now look like a practice run. The question I have is: how long can this resistance continue? Resupplying the Ukrainian military will only get more difficult as time goes on, and newspaper headline will only get uglier. Unfortunately, until and unless sanctions degrade Russia's ability to sustain the occupation, the trajectory of this war will only get worse. Stalemates are horrible. It's never ending bloodshed, but I don't yet see how it's avoidable. I do not currently see a path forward for either Russian victory or a negotiated peace that isn't Ukrainian capitulation.

3) What can the West do to support Ukrainian resistance (that isn't being done now, and won't trigger nuclear war)?

I don't think anyone (who matters) is arguing against providing humanitarian and military aid to Ukraine. There are some who think we aren't doing enough, but none of us has good visibility to the political and logistical challenges. One thing I can not support is a no-fly zone. 80% of the Russian air force is currently not in the war. I don't see how escalating the air war helps anyone. Best, I think, to continue supplying as much anti-aircraft and anti-missile technology as possible, making the current air war as costly to Putin as possible.

Expand the economic and military alliance beyond NATO. China will only act in their own best interests. We have to convince them that supporting Russia will come with a high cost. Biden laid that out for Xi yesterday. We'll see if it does any good going forward. Putin looks like he is willing to starve his country in order to continue his military campaign. Unfortunately for Russia, I can not see a future that doesn't end in isolation and bread lines.

4) Final thoughts.

What is happening in Ukraine now will have a lasting effect on world geopolitics for decades to come. My hope, as far fetched as it may sound, is that we can starve Putin's war machine and end his attempt to reestablish the Soviet Union. I would prefer to see a cold war stalemate in Ukraine as opposed to a pretend negotiated peace. Putin isn't interested in good faith negotiation, and he has shown he will not honor treaties. Best, I think, to keep him bogged down in Ukraine as long as possible. It is, IMO, the only thing that is stopping him from expanding his invasion to other countries.

The salutation is my favorite part of Mick's posts. I chose it here because it reminds me that, with very few exceptions, we are all just a bunch of old, music-loving western blokes who are genuinely concerned about the world and enjoy a good chin wag. It's why I'm here, and suspect the same is true for many of us. I hope it is still fair to say that our differences are pretty small compared to our shared values.
 
80% of Russian Air Force not committed is a very clarifying bit of intelligence. Putin's Air Force, as long as it is in Air Force-in-being, is a valuable and irreplaceable asset, a great source of power. Committing it would be an act with a potential to lose the war for him, in an afternoon.
 
cooky1257 said:
Well now Mathew has made his position clear we can take comfort in the fact he doesn't have a solution/negotiation position acceptable to both sides either and is, despite his contrarian posts, in fact just wailing against the inhumanity of it all with the rest of us.;-)
Click to expand...

I don't believe talks will get anywhere until something or someone gets Putin off his current position. This I believe is the impediment to progress rather than a reluctance on the part of the Ukrainians to engage in talks. Nor do I think the problem is an unwillingness in the West to eat a little crow and allow Putin some sort of face saving off ramp if it means an end to the fighting.

And because progress is predicated on getting Putin to change his position I don't believe calls for talks amounts to much more than well meaning platitudes. Which is fine in a politician because you have to say something and this is about all they can say at this point when asked what they are going to do about it.

But if people are suggesting talks are a way forward rather than something that will eventually have to take place for us to get to lead to a solution-- as seemed to be the case here. Then I think it is incumbent on those people to say, if only in broad terms, on what basis such talks should proceed. Such people should also not be surprised to be asked to expand on what they mean as the implication of their position is that they have something other than just saying "talks would be good".

This would all make sense if my position was one of a hawkish neocon on US cable news calling for MOAR WAR! but it's not and all I have said on here is broadly the Biden / Centrist Dad position and I don't think particularly complicated or controversial let alone contrarian.

tl;dr Calls for talks are fine but a bit cart before the horse because the problem here is not a reluctance to talk but a willingness by Putin to wage war and we should address that first. I do not have any suggestions as to how to do that other than thinking Biden has done, by and large, the right thing so far.
 
DonQuixote99 said:
80% of Russian Air Force not committed is a very clarifying bit of intelligence. Putin's Air Force, as long as it is in Air Force-in-being, is a valuable and irreplaceable asset, a great source of power. Committing it would be an act with a potential to lose the war for him, in an afternoon.
Click to expand...

Yes. And as well as not committing numbers, he has also not committed his best planes or pilots so far.
 
matthewr said:
Yes. And as well as not committing numbers, he has also not committed his best planes or pilots so far.
Click to expand...
I think that the main reason the Russian air force is not in air support action is because they are continuing to lose a lot of planes - about a hundred so far.

There also have been reports that on several Russian planes that were shot down the ejection seat was disabled.
 
ks.234 said:
Why are you asking me what I would give? What I would give is irrelevant. This is about what Ukraine is willing to give in exchange for peace. It is up to Ukraine to decide if that price is too high. If you are correct and Putin wants territory, it is up the Ukraine to decide if that is a price worth paying. If you are correct and Putin wants to dilute Ukrainian sovereignty, then Ukraine might (I suggest) decide that is not a price worth paying. You also say that Putin wants to write a bunch of rules, but again if this is correct, I doubt it would be acceptable to Ukraine. Ukraine might also decide that continuing the fighting is a price worth paying to drive out Russia by force, or to strengthen the Ukrainian bargaining position further for a more acceptable peace later on.

I’m struggling to make sense of your second paragraph where you say that Putin wants to conquer Ukraine, install a puppet government etc, but that would be unacceptable. If it’s unacceptable, and I would agree it is, and what’s more it is, as you say, unachievable, why on earth would Ukraine agree to it?

Your last paragraph is a repeat of the first two, and my answer is the same. If what is on the table, and as far as I can see we don’t know what, if anything, is on the table, is unacceptable, then Ukrainians will not accept it. If Putin will not come to the negotiating table, then there will be no peace negotiations

Not sure who you think is trying to magic up a solution, if you think it’s me then you’re mistaken, I am nowhere near clever enough nor knowledgeable enough to come up with solutions. The only thing I have done is suggest that if, and I’ve highlighted the word ‘if’ in many posts now, the objective is to end the suffering of Ukrainians as soon as possible, then peace talks are the only way to achieve that end. Any solution will be down to those doing the negotiating. The only other option is a continuation and likely escalation of the war with the consequence that the suffering of Ukrainian men, women and children will continue and the body count will rise. If you are dismissive of exploring if there is any potential for peace, then a more war and suffering is all that’s left

If there is a better option, that alternative might, just might, be worth exploring

To be honest, I’m not sure why exploring a potential alternative to continued and escalating war is so controversial on pfm.

Especially as Zelensky himself has now called for peace talks and he obviously seems to think it an option worth exploring.
Click to expand...
Peace talks have been going on for some time. So what you have called for has already been achieved.
 
matthewr said:
But if people are suggesting talks are a way forward rather than something that will eventually have to take place for us to get to lead to a solution-- as seemed to be the case here. Then I think it is incumbent on those people to say, if only in broad terms, on what basis such talks should proceed. Such people should also not be surprised to be asked to expand on what they mean as the implication of their position is that they have something other than just saying "talks would be good".
Click to expand...

But there is a problem right there, it is obvious that just to get Putin to negotiations, then a consideration of Putin’s fears, paranoias and domestic needs, have to be on the table. A consideration of, not a submission to. The problem is that when that has been suggested on here the reaction has been extremely hostile, one or two posters not being able to accept anything less than the killing of Putin and any further discussion has descended into abuse.

It seems obvious that if a negotiated withdrawal (rather than assassinating Putin, WW3 or any of the other more nutty suggestions) is the objective, then as unpleasant as it might be, a consideration of what Putin wants has to be on the table just to get him to sit at the table. That is not to suggest that any capitulation to Putin’s demands are on the table, the point, the first step, is to get him to the negotiating table and if a workable solution is to be found it will have to give Putin a diplomatic win to take home while preserving the sovereignty of Ukraine.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top