The German foreign ministry, which commissioned the study after suspecting it was being targeted by bots, said the findings highlighted the need for governments to systematically tackle the growing number of disinformation campaigns and recognise the effect they could have on elections.
Russia was very explicit in its intent of breaking that Memorandum, it does not change the fact that promising NATO was dangerous and stupid. And it was also cynical because NATO membership was impossible so long as the conflict in the Donbas was ongoing, effectively forcing Russia to never back down there.
I’m not saying the Russian government are the good guys or the Western governments are the bad guys, I am saying that big states with big armies have interests and the will to use violence to attain those interests, this is how the world works and we should act accordingly. So if a nuclear power says it is willing to go to war over an alliance membership, it should be taken serious and a peaceful solution should be sought.
Right now I am in favour of a cease fire, this does not mean the occupied territories become Russian, it just means the fighting stops. And at this stage of the war I don’t think one can say with confidence that a continued conflict increases the chance of Ukraine gaining its territories back. All one can say with confidence is that less people die with a cease fire.
On your last question: I don’t have a country, I am a citizen. And if the government (foreign or native) treats me bad enough I might be willing to resist them. But I sure as hell would not want to be conscripted (by any government) to be send into the meat grinder. And if you think differently (and wouldn’t mind a night of bad sleep) I invite you to read up on the fait of Ukrainian conscripts; there is a reason Ukraine has trouble finding new recruits, a very good reason.
Nobody is forcing Russia to never back down. For start they could have respected the memorandum and let Ukraine decide what to do as sovereign nation. Nobody forced Russia to invade the Donbas at the time, only their fear that NATO would do who know what. Or the fact that Putin need external enemies to blame for everything bad in Russia
Oh yes, that will go well. Following your reasoning, to end the war in Ukraine we just need that NATO declare that it is willing to use nuclear weapons over Ukraine joining the alliance. Damn, call the NATO HQ and propose it, the war will be over by the weekend.
While I am all in for a peaceful solution I am also aware that to have peace you need to have both sides to want it, otherwise after a “give me this or else” there will be a “give me that or else”. So if Russia says it is willing to go to war, the answer should be “let’s talk about this and solve peacefully, but keep in mind that if we really go to war over this, we will stand and both of us will be fucked up”.
Then I don’t know how you can make a peace deal with a nation who already demonstrated to be willing to ignore the deal it sign if it is conventient to them. (not that they are the only ones to be honest)
And then ? What make you think that a) Russia respect it and b) Russia would concede something ?
Don’t play games, you know exactly what I am asking and the fact that you try so hard to avoid to give a clear answer tell me much more about you than any answer you can give.
Which leads to the question: since the enemy is brutal we must just concede everything it want ?
And btw, I had read and listen to much worst stories.
Russia wanted to place nukes on Cuba, the US said ‘if you do this there will be war’ so Russia backed down. This did not lead to an all out invasion of Russia, this lead to a de escalation and Billions of people not dying.
I gave you my honest answer, let me ask you a question in return. Why are you not volunteering? Ukraine has a man power problem because even the Ukrainians don’t want to die for this cause. So if it’s so important, why don’t you go there and stand on a Russian landmine so a Ukrainian conscript doesn’t have to.
It is a little more complex than this.
US deployed Jupiter nuclear missiles in Italy and Turkey and URSS, to retaliate, deployed R-12 and R-14 ballistic missiles to Cuba. And before taking any action, US denied the deployment of URSS missiles.
When US aknowledged it, the first option suggested to Kennedy was a air strike on Cuba and an invasion.
What happened is that US put in place what was basically a naval blockade of Cuba (even if they call quarantine to avoid war related terms) and then started to talk.
The end result was that officially URSS retired the missiles and bombers from Cuba, and US agree to non invade Cuba and secretly retired the missiles deployed in Turkey (not sure about Italy).
But I am sure that you understand that this worked exactly because the “if you do this there will be war” was a credible threat ans was sustained by actions (the blockade)
Now, in Ukraine if you propose a cease fire what actually can put on the table to make Russia back down from the invasion ? A deal which will be ignored in [choose your number] years ? Let Russia keep what they gained and go without repercussions so they can pull the trick again in [choose your number] years ? Do you really think that Ukraine would accept to lose part of their terrirories (which btw are the ones witn more resources like gas and oil) ?
I agree with you, we should find a way to stop the war. I simply don’t see how being accommodating with Russia will make it when the root cause of this war is that we let Russia think that they can do whatever they want without any consequences.
I am too old and no more phisically fit.