By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions. We in turn value your personal details in accordance with our Privacy Policy.
Please log in or register. Registered visitors get fewer ads.
'Last month, Ukraine decided to suspend consular services for military-age Ukrainian men in a bid to boost its struggling army. Those who left before and after the war began will be affected by the move.
According to the new law, from May 18, men aged between 18 and 60 living abroad will not be able to access key services unless they update their data in their local conscription centres in Ukraine.
For most of these men, getting a new passport, marriage certificate or driver’s licence would ultimately mean abandoning their adopted country for the foreseeable future, as those eligible for military service cannot leave wartime Ukraine.'
'Last month, Ukraine decided to suspend consular services for military-age Ukrainian men in a bid to boost its struggling army. Those who left before and after the war began will be affected by the move.
According to the new law, from May 18, men aged between 18 and 60 living abroad will not be able to access key services unless they update their data in their local conscription centres in Ukraine.
For most of these men, getting a new passport, marriage certificate or driver’s licence would ultimately mean abandoning their adopted country for the foreseeable future, as those eligible for military service cannot leave wartime Ukraine.'
This also indicates that it is not just weapons that Ukraine is short of.
0
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 19:07 - May 21 with 4432 views
Reports today that Putin is keen on a ceasefire based upon current battlelines. Whilst an end to hostilities would be fantastic news, Ukraine would lose territory. Perhaps the biggest issue is how do you stop Russia rebuilding its forces for another crack - they’ve made no secret that they wanted to seize Kiev.
Putin, like Hitler tells lie after lie. Any guarantees of a more permanent peace would surely require an international force on the border. Promises alone cannot be enough, I mean if you can’t trust a malevolent dictator, who can you trust…
0
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 16:45 - May 24 with 4282 views
Reports today that Putin is keen on a ceasefire based upon current battlelines. Whilst an end to hostilities would be fantastic news, Ukraine would lose territory. Perhaps the biggest issue is how do you stop Russia rebuilding its forces for another crack - they’ve made no secret that they wanted to seize Kiev.
Putin, like Hitler tells lie after lie. Any guarantees of a more permanent peace would surely require an international force on the border. Promises alone cannot be enough, I mean if you can’t trust a malevolent dictator, who can you trust…
1938 is calling, it wants it's broken record back.
There was a ceasefire negotiated after the Russian backed breakaway in 2014, Russia couldn't help itself though. It will play the same game if it gets to freeze the conflict again. The West must hold firm and steadfast in it's support of Ukrainian victory. Otherwise you might as well host the negotiations in Munich and use black magic to resurrect Chamberlain to take part.
3
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:32 - May 26 with 4174 views
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:32 - May 26 by Eireannach_gorm
Two guided missiles hit their target.
I hope to keep the two topics separate overall but at what point does the ICJ start investigating Putin for war crimes? This has lead to the death of civilians for no reason other than a sick power play (as has much of the war).
You may have noticed increased news about the idea that russia is ready to ‘negotiate’. Given that the Kremlin has broken pretty much every single international treaty it’s ever signed up to, it’s right to be sceptical about such statements. However, as Tymofiy Mylovanov, President of the Kviv School of Economics, argues today, there are other reasons to reject such ‘offers’:
“Reuters reports that Putin wants a ceasefire at current frontlines. Sources say he's ready for peace if he can keep captured territories; otherwise, he'll advance but this is misleading! If he can advance, he surely has the capacity to hold what he's captured
His comments in Belarus this week show typical bad faith. While claiming to be ready for peace, he also said Zelensky isn't a legitimate president. So, he is ready to talk peace with the leader of Ukraine, but not Zelensky!
What kind of "getting to peace" logic is that?
Putin also brought Yanukovich, a former Ukrainian president, to show alongside him in Minsk
The message here is that Yanukovych is the legitimate president.
Yanukovych fled Ukraine to Russia in 2014 after ordering to shoot civilians who were protesting his pro-Russia about-face turnaround. He was later voted out by the parliament of Ukraine.
Putin annexed Crimea and invaded the east of Ukraine shortly thereafter
Since then Putin claimed that the new democratically elected Ukrainian leaders are illegitimate, that the 2014 annexation and invasion were forced, and that there was a coup.
But if anything, it is Putin who has legitimacy problems. He is now in office for the fifth time and his elections have not been internationally recognized. Putin has also killed and persecuted his opposition
Zelensky says Putin is not a representative of Russia, never negotiates in good faith and can't be trusted.
Reuters also says that Putin has no designs for NATO territory and is afraid of domestic mobilization.
Really? Putin continues to kill Russians by thousands a day as cannon fodder. This doesn't appear to be a constraint for now.
And what about removing demarcation buoys with Estonia earlier this week and sending media messages that Russian unilaterally stops recognizing the sea borders with Baltic countries?
Putin did say he doesn't intend to invade Ukraine just before the invasion. So, how much is his word worth? Are people still gullible? Or has everyone stopped believing anything he says?
Zelensky responded to Putin statements by pointing out that Putin wants to undermine consensus and coalition building at the coming peace summit in Switzerland
Indeed, if some countries fall for Putin's "new talk of peace, but not with Zelensky" that will derail the focus on coalition building and unity in Switzerland. This is also why Putin wants to undermine perceived agency of Zelensky.”
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:44 - May 27 by pointofblue
I hope to keep the two topics separate overall but at what point does the ICJ start investigating Putin for war crimes? This has lead to the death of civilians for no reason other than a sick power play (as has much of the war).
It is only the ICC which can take actions against individuals as opposed to states.
Concerning the ICJ and the war in Ukraine, on 16 March 2022 the ICJ ordered Russia to "immediately suspend the military operations". The order is binding on Russia, but the ICJ cannot enforce it. This is similar to the order the ICJ recently made against Israel, although the order concerning Israel only related to operations in Rafah.
Concerning the ICC and the war in Ukraine, on 17 March 2023 following an investigation the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin for war crimes. In the case of Israel, the ICC has asked for an arrest warrant for Netanyahu to be issued for war crimes.
The arrest warrant has had an impact on Putin's movements, and the same would be true for Netanyahu.
[Post edited 28 May 2024 11:22]
1
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:54 - May 28 with 3822 views
Reports today that Putin is keen on a ceasefire based upon current battlelines. Whilst an end to hostilities would be fantastic news, Ukraine would lose territory. Perhaps the biggest issue is how do you stop Russia rebuilding its forces for another crack - they’ve made no secret that they wanted to seize Kiev.
Putin, like Hitler tells lie after lie. Any guarantees of a more permanent peace would surely require an international force on the border. Promises alone cannot be enough, I mean if you can’t trust a malevolent dictator, who can you trust…
Russia were never after Kiev, they just wanted the ground they have now.
It was always going to end this way, as there is no way Ukraine could ever beat Russia militarily.
Best thing now for all involved is to try to come to peace terms, and maybe allow some of the area to be neutral territory. No point continuing a war, and bankrupting the whole of europe, for very little gain. We aren't going to beat Russia without NATO boots on the ground, and that then presents a whole new problem.
Also atrocities committed on both side. Maybe time now to try and put an end, before the youth of both countries is completely decimated.
For some reason talking of peace is controversial now though.
[Post edited 28 May 2024 11:57]
0
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:58 - May 28 with 3808 views
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:20 - May 28 by DJR
It is only the ICC which can take actions against individuals as opposed to states.
Concerning the ICJ and the war in Ukraine, on 16 March 2022 the ICJ ordered Russia to "immediately suspend the military operations". The order is binding on Russia, but the ICJ cannot enforce it. This is similar to the order the ICJ recently made against Israel, although the order concerning Israel only related to operations in Rafah.
Concerning the ICC and the war in Ukraine, on 17 March 2023 following an investigation the ICC issued an arrest warrant for Putin for war crimes. In the case of Israel, the ICC has asked for an arrest warrant for Netanyahu to be issued for war crimes.
The arrest warrant has had an impact on Putin's movements, and the same would be true for Netanyahu.
[Post edited 28 May 2024 11:22]
Thank you. With it being issued over a year ago I had forgotten they had issued a warrant.
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 12:51 - May 29 by Eireannach_gorm
This could be an interesting development and big pressure on US to allow it.
Really interesting to see the EU more hawkish on this than the US. Not how it's always been in the past. Funny how for all the negative talk from Trump regarding NATO (and the noise about him being too cosy with Putin), it's Biden that is so weak.
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 11:54 - May 28 by Roggydem
Russia were never after Kiev, they just wanted the ground they have now.
It was always going to end this way, as there is no way Ukraine could ever beat Russia militarily.
Best thing now for all involved is to try to come to peace terms, and maybe allow some of the area to be neutral territory. No point continuing a war, and bankrupting the whole of europe, for very little gain. We aren't going to beat Russia without NATO boots on the ground, and that then presents a whole new problem.
Also atrocities committed on both side. Maybe time now to try and put an end, before the youth of both countries is completely decimated.
For some reason talking of peace is controversial now though.
[Post edited 28 May 2024 11:57]
1) there would be no atrocities at all if Russia hadn’t invaded. Every civilian death is on Russia as the foreign aggressor. 2) they didn’t want Kiev? Only if you ignore their attempts to capture Kiev at the outset of the war. 3) clearly you have no clue about economics or scale. The EU is the second largest economy in the world, Russia has an economy smaller than Italy, it would bankrupt a long time before Europe. Especially as Russia has been cut off from most of the capital markets in the world.
Fantastic both-sidesing.
1
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 16:07 - Jun 22 with 3196 views
Whilst the peace summit organised by President Zelenskyy was underway in Switzerland last weekend, the Kremlin put forward its own ‘demands’ for a Russian ceasefire, for which read as a pause in the fighting that would allow the country to regroup and come back stronger further down the line. Professor of Strategic Studies University of St. Andrews in Scotland, Phillips P. O’Brien digs into the dog’s dinner that’s on the table:
“There is a very strange double standard when it comes to the way any possible “peace” deal is discussed between Ukraine and Russia. Basically, nothing Putin says is to really to be taken seriously, while Ukraine is supposed to make concessions based on the fact that, regardless of what Putin does say—he is actually looking for a deal that will allow Ukraine to be a sovereign state.
It’s worth noting the number of articles in the western media which argue that Ukraine must somehow agree to a (non-existent) peace deal with Russia. This non-existent peace deal narrative is regularly pushed, most prominently I suppose by Samuel Charap and others.
His recent New York Times Op-Ed page had a very strange argument on the matter just this week—where the onus on searching for a peace deal is entirely on Ukraine. Indeed, if you read the text, and the earlier text by Charap, you’d be fooled into thinking thsat Russia is out to reach a peace deal, but it’s those annoying Ukrainians (and their partners) who are seemingly unwilling to do the right thing.
In the article—Russia is presented as a true partner for peace, and the Putin regime is apparently looking to reach a deal. As the article says explicitly—Russia wants to negotiate a deal, but Ukraine is not working hard enough to work one out.
“Russia has expressed willingness to negotiate, though it has not been invited to the conference because Ukraine suspects that Russia will just use the meeting for show”.
The fascinating example which the article uses to show how eager Putin is for peace is the Russian dictator’s interview with Tucker Carlson.
Moreover, the deal imagined has Ukraine making all the major concessions and Russia being offered sweeteners to accept a deal. Thus Ukraine would have to recognize that it cannot get the land occupied by Russia back—and moreover, Ukraine would have to accept that it cannot join NATO for now (or really any time) as there is no specific date given when this can be allowed.
Here is the ceasefire-deal-for-territory section. Yes Ukraine is entirely in the right—but that doesn’t matter! It must cede its territory de facto and make no more attempts to regain it.
Ukraine has pledged never to cede territory. This is supported by international law that forbids the seizure of territory by force, and Ukraine should not surrender its lawful claim to its land. But to secure a lasting cease-fire, it may need to recognize that Russia has control, though not sovereignty, over portions of four Ukrainian regions and Crimea — and halt its quest to seize back occupied areas by force.
Here is the peace deal for NATO.
As part of a peace agreement, Ukraine may also have to pause its NATO application and promise not to join for a number of years, say five to 10. This is made easier because NATO members are still far from united on allowing a nation at war into the alliance, especially given fears that membership could result in a NATO war with nuclear-armed Russia. Still, it would be a major concession.
But Ukraine can still sign bilateral treaties with individual NATO members for security support — something it has already started to do, for example, with France, Germany and Britain. Future security guarantees will need to include strong provisions for supplying weapons and intelligence to Ukraine, and help to prevent cyberattacks. That said, Ukraine’s allies would probably not be allowed to place military bases on its soil.
Long story short—Ukraine gives up territory it legally possesses, gives up the prospect of NATO membership—and allows Putin time to rebuild his military.
And what concessions would Russia then make? Well, none it seems. Indeed, the author argues that Putin should be given sweeteners to accept this terrible deal for Ukraine—including the relaxing of sanctions and a return to buying Russian oil at market prices—in other words, a massive infusion of capital into Russia is also something that Ukraine will have to accept.
To make a peace deal more acceptable to Russia, it could be offered sanctions relief, contingent on compliance with the agreement. Russia could then trade its oil and gas at market prices, though Western countries could institute mechanisms for the immediate reimposition — the so-called snapback — of sanctions if needed. Russia would regain access to its withheld gold and foreign currency reserves in the West.
In summary, the narrative that has been given is that Putin really wants a deal, will get all the territory he now possesses, Ukraine will stop trying to regain its territory, Ukraine will give up any short-term prospect to join NATO, Russia will be made richer by the relaxation of sanctions, and Russia will be allowed to rebuild its military.
It’s hard to think of a “peace” deal more perfectly constructed not to bring peace.
Thankfully, Putin stepped in to reveal the nonsense built into such arguments. A few hours after that piece was published, Putin announced that we would indeed discuss a ceasefire—but Ukraine would have to cede far more territory, give up NATO permanently, etc. etc.
First off—Putin starts with the basic position that he did not launch a war of conquest in 2022 (or 2014).
"We didn't start the war," Russia's president said. "It was the Kyiv regime."
According to Putin, Ukraine would have to give up all the territory that Russia has illegally annexed (including a great deal that it does not occupy, such as the west bank of the Dnipro in Kherson oblast). And Ukraine would not only have to give up NATO wishes, it would have to pledge to limit its military in the future (leaving it at Russia’s mercy in the future). Here was one news story summary of his position.
Putin insisted that Kyiv should withdraw from all four annexed regions entirely and essentially cede them to Moscow within their administrative borders. In Zaporizhzhia in the southeast, Russia still doesn’t control the region’s administrative capital with a pre-war population of about 700,000; in the neighbouring Kherson region, Moscow withdrew from its biggest city and capital of the same name in November 2022.
Thankfully Putin’s intervention should make twothings clear. He does not really want “peace” at this point—he wants to illegally seize much of Ukraine, rebuild his military, and keep Ukraine out of NATO. He wants a situation where he can re-start the war on his terms in the future. And second, that those arguing for such a deal have placed Ukraine in an impossible Catch 22. Ukraine is expected to make all the concessions, while Russia gets all the benefits. Moreover, they are basing their arguments that Putin is willing to negotiate in good faith.
This seems bizarre. Putin is clearly willing to slaughter his own people in extraordinary numbers to capture strategically irrelevant farm fields. He has shown he is happy to bombard civilians across Ukraine, commit countless war crimes, and continues to deny Ukrainian nationhood. This is the reality of what we are seeing. Moreover, he is almost certainly waiting to see the results of the 2024 presidential election—which hold out to him the happy prospect of a Trump presidency. Just this week Trump, once again, let it be known how little he cares for Ukraine.
In a meeting with GOP members of Congress this week, Trump stated he was opposed to the $60 billion aid bill for Ukraine and saw no benefit for the US if Ukraine does well in the war.
Trump also criticized a $60 billion aid package for Ukraine that recently passed with Republican support, lawmakers said.
"He's like, if Ukraine wins, what will be the benefit?" Republican Representative Don Bacon told reporters.
People always like to say they want peace. However, sometimes peace is not available, and a “peace” deal does not lead to peace. We are in such a situation now. Russia does not want peace on terms except for Ukrainian amputation and strategic degradation. All this would do is set up a situation for future war in Europe.
As sad as it is, if Ukraine wishes to fight (and it does), it’s up to Ukraine’s supporters to give it the aid that it needs to fight and win the war. That is the best road to peace.
Whilst some have pointed to the resilience of the Russian economy on a macro level, it’s important to point out that sanctions have still left it in trouble. As I’ve noted before, Russia is not expected to reach pre-war levels of oil and gas exports until 2030, Gasprom are having to sell exports subsidised and lost $7bn last year. It is not true to say sanctions have been ineffective ‘because they’ll just send exports to China and India instead’. The infrastructure does not currently exist, there are medium term plans for a pipeline from Siberia to China. However, as I noted before China is no real ally to Russia - they are a shark circling a wounded prey. To this point China are leveraging the pipeline project, only agreeing for it to go ahead at a price that will lose money for Russia. With the Russian’s already burning off gas they can’t sell, and selling the rest at a loss, Xi is no fool:-
“China, however, rarely allows an opportunity to extract a price to pass by. It is playing economic hardball with Russia, and Russia has little ammunition with which to fight back. Regardless of how this negotiation turns out, the Sino-Russian relationship is changing. Vladimir Putin now knows that, notwithstanding any prior claim that with China he has a "friendship without limits." Simply put, China will not inconvenience itself to help its northern neighbor. Simultaneously, Russia's economic isolation is only deepening, and Vladimir Putin may be running out of time to reverse it.”
With the cost of living crisis easing in the West and inflation largely tamed, the same cannot be said for Russia. The central bank has maintained the base rate at 16pc in order to try and prop up the Rouble, and ease inflation driven by the rising cost of imports. Both have hit disposable incomes for Russians added to day to day inconveniences such as shortages of car parts due to trade ties been cut with the West.
1
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 10:23 - Jul 8 with 2706 views
There is a belief that this attack is to send a message to The NATO summit.
Also Biden's difficulties are being amplified.
Several foreign officials said that Biden’s slump in the polls would compound problems from this year’s bruising fight in Congress over the $60.8bn in military aid to Ukraine and make it less likely for the administration to take bold action.
“The issue with his age has become a major concern … a distraction from other real issues [for Nato],” said a European official. One administration official told the Washington Post that the summit has “gone from an orchestrated spectacle to one of the most anxious gatherings in modern times”.
0
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 12:38 - Jul 9 with 2425 views
The 'special military operation' continues to reach new lows. on 12:11 - Jul 9 by Eireannach_gorm
There is a belief that this attack is to send a message to The NATO summit.
Also Biden's difficulties are being amplified.
Several foreign officials said that Biden’s slump in the polls would compound problems from this year’s bruising fight in Congress over the $60.8bn in military aid to Ukraine and make it less likely for the administration to take bold action.
“The issue with his age has become a major concern … a distraction from other real issues [for Nato],” said a European official. One administration official told the Washington Post that the summit has “gone from an orchestrated spectacle to one of the most anxious gatherings in modern times”.
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
