• Buffalox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    26 days ago

    That’s just hearsay, but even if true, it doesn’t support your claim. “understanding” almost surely doesn’t mean what you seem to think it means. And the part about 18-25 year olds are not “Ukrainian decision-makers”.

    Ukraine officials have been VERY clear, there can be no peace with concessions to Russia, because that will almost surely mean Russia will invade again, when they have gathered strength.

    If Ukraine were to surrender territory, they would have to be allowed into NATO, to be secured from repeat attack from Russia. Otherwise Russia will just think they can take some piece of Ukraine now, and the rest later.

    • Rose@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      26 days ago

      If Ukraine were to surrender territory, they would have to be allowed into NATO, to be secured from repeat attack from Russia.

      I do think that’s one of the more realistic scenarios expected under Trump, though I’m not sure about it having to rest specifically on NATO and not some other written security guarantees. However, in that scenario, Russia gets to keep its gains and the world returns to business as usual, as we saw after Russia’s actions in Moldova, Georgia, Syria, Ukraine in 2014, etc (and that’s just the military involvement, not to mention the countless influence and infiltration campaigns, isolated sabotage and killings in Europe, among other things). It could stop Russia from moving forward in Ukraine, but it wouldn’t stop Russia from choosing another target as it always has.

      • Buffalox@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        26 days ago

        and not some other written security guarantees.

        Ukraine was already guaranteed that Russia wouldn’t attack them, when they gave up their nuclear weapons to Russia in the 90’s. Something similar will not fly again.