Excellent; well said. And then, of course, there is the minor issue of taking Putin at face value in terms of any assurances he may offer or agreements he might sign. For a bunch of realists, they seem awfully naive in their belief that an agreement would be enduring. I seem to recall something that was signed in Budapest a while back....
Not to mention, none of these clowns seem to acknowledge Russia’s stated aims, which is a lot more than the currently occupied territories. Why would anyone try to ”make a deal” with someone who explicitly says they’re gonna be back for more?
Your feet-firmly-on-the-ground realism is such a welcome and needed rebuttal of the feet-deeply-lodged-in-mouth inanities peddled by the Putler pundits. Anyone arguing that we should ‘take account of the Kremlin’s legitimate security interests’ should be made to write out the text of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum 100 times and then be required by law to begin any article by quoting it in full.
Another issue these experts seem to either ignore, or be unaware of, is that Russian negotiations are always underlaid by a win-lose mentality. Bringing that mediation approach of negotiating each side’s interests will not work with Russia because that would always be interpreted as “We lost”.
Jun 9, 2023·edited Jun 9, 2023Liked by Neil A. Abrams
Thank you, Mr. Abrams.
I can't describe how it feels for us here in Ukraine to read some of your esteemed colleagues. I thought this war would finally help them to understand that Ukrainians, surprisingly, have some agency, and, I know it might sound wild, might know thing or two Ukr-Rus relationships too. Hell, we might even have something interesting to say about it if one is willing to listen, but I guess that's a bridge too far for many of them.
Would be great to also dismantle Prof. Kotkin crazy ideas of letting China to manage the piece talks in his latest lecture, as well as the latest piece in Foreign Affairs by Samuel Charap.
Another issue worth noting is that Russia has annexed Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, and insists that as part of any peace talks Ukraine must "recognize the new territorial realities". This is what in my opinion makes peace talks impossible as long as Putin remains in power - you simply cannot negotiate if your opponent claims that you must recognize that they have permanently seized 20% of your territory. Until the "referendum" took place it could in theory have been possible to negotiate an end to the war, but this option is gone now.
“... torture, enforced disappearance, summary execution, hostage-taking, illegal detention, falsification of criminal cases, arson, and a lack of fair trials ...”, ah, Israel, i get it
Excellent; well said. And then, of course, there is the minor issue of taking Putin at face value in terms of any assurances he may offer or agreements he might sign. For a bunch of realists, they seem awfully naive in their belief that an agreement would be enduring. I seem to recall something that was signed in Budapest a while back....
Exactly. I was going to bring that up but didn’t want to make the post too long.
Not to mention, none of these clowns seem to acknowledge Russia’s stated aims, which is a lot more than the currently occupied territories. Why would anyone try to ”make a deal” with someone who explicitly says they’re gonna be back for more?
Your feet-firmly-on-the-ground realism is such a welcome and needed rebuttal of the feet-deeply-lodged-in-mouth inanities peddled by the Putler pundits. Anyone arguing that we should ‘take account of the Kremlin’s legitimate security interests’ should be made to write out the text of the 1994 Budapest Memorandum 100 times and then be required by law to begin any article by quoting it in full.
Another issue these experts seem to either ignore, or be unaware of, is that Russian negotiations are always underlaid by a win-lose mentality. Bringing that mediation approach of negotiating each side’s interests will not work with Russia because that would always be interpreted as “We lost”.
I agree.
Thank you, Mr. Abrams.
I can't describe how it feels for us here in Ukraine to read some of your esteemed colleagues. I thought this war would finally help them to understand that Ukrainians, surprisingly, have some agency, and, I know it might sound wild, might know thing or two Ukr-Rus relationships too. Hell, we might even have something interesting to say about it if one is willing to listen, but I guess that's a bridge too far for many of them.
Замечательно, отлично. С чувством, с толком, с расстановкой. Спасибо.
Спасибо Вам, Валерий!
Would be great to also dismantle Prof. Kotkin crazy ideas of letting China to manage the piece talks in his latest lecture, as well as the latest piece in Foreign Affairs by Samuel Charap.
Thank you for this article!
Another issue worth noting is that Russia has annexed Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, and insists that as part of any peace talks Ukraine must "recognize the new territorial realities". This is what in my opinion makes peace talks impossible as long as Putin remains in power - you simply cannot negotiate if your opponent claims that you must recognize that they have permanently seized 20% of your territory. Until the "referendum" took place it could in theory have been possible to negotiate an end to the war, but this option is gone now.
“... torture, enforced disappearance, summary execution, hostage-taking, illegal detention, falsification of criminal cases, arson, and a lack of fair trials ...”, ah, Israel, i get it
Yeah? Which is also bad. What point do you think you're making here?
Ukraine is only the small beginning.
This time we (even non-Russians) will not be communists but only Partisans, and denazify the whole world, first NATO, forever and ever.
Ukraine is only the small beginning.
This time we (even non-Russians) will not be communists but only Partisans, and denazify the whole world, first NATO, forever and ever.