Volodymyr Zelensky, in the next phase of talks to end the war in Ukraine, intends to draw a red line at the most contentious issue on the table: the Russian demand for Ukraine’s sovereign territory. As long as he remains the nation’s president, Zelensky will not agree to give up land in exchange for peace, Ukraine’s chief negotiator, Andriy Yermak, told me today in an exclusive interview.
“Not a single sane person today would sign a document to give up territory,” said Yermak, who has served as Zelensky’s chief of staff, lead negotiator, and closest aide throughout the full-scale war with Russia.
“As long as Zelensky is president, no one should count on us giving up territory. He will not sign away territory,” he told me by telephone from Kyiv. “The constitution prohibits this. Nobody can do that unless they want to go against the Ukrainian constitution and the Ukrainian people.”
Russia argues that there was a regime change in 2014 which released them from that agreement.
That’s not how agreements work. If it was, they would be pointless.
Minsk II, they are pointless. People even question US and French Nato commitment.
But hypothetically speaking, why should Russia be bound to the agreement if the West actually did a regime change?
What about the majority of Ukranians that voted for the gov that got overthrown in 2014? Their voices and opinions don’t count?
Opinions change, afterall those same people voted at least partly for Zelenskyi
Russia says a lot of things
Shocking new informartion shows that russia had their fingers crossed behind their backs at the time the deal was made.
Their argument is that they didn’t break the agreement.
Yeah, in 2014 Ukrainians just got rid of pro-Russian government in Ukraine what, of course, violated the agreement of peace since Russia cannot claim Ukraine peacefully anymore. This is actually “totally” logical.
We call the Russian influence on the West hybrid war, wouldn’t the Western influence in Ukraine be the same?
Same, same, but different. I agree that both these cases can be classified as influence, but, at least as I know, the influence of the West has no intention to occupy Ukraine or turn it into puppet state. The West mostly needs resources, democratic alignment and overall stability, while it has no interest in wiping out the national identity of Ukrainians and abuse them, unlike Russia. So, between 2 evils it would be better to choose the lesser one.
Britain got out of the EU for this reason.
What about the posts about Amazon working conditions and US healthcare? At least Germany is approaching US conditions.
How policies of this company are related here? I agree that Amazon abuses their workers, but the workers have a freedom to leave this job. Government doesn’t force them to work there, it only participates in the creating of conditions that may force people to work there. While, as I understand, Russia is going to oppress Ukraininas on a level of government in case of successful conquering of territories. And I haven’t even mentioned the overall hate of ordinary Russians to Ukrainians.
So, as for Ukrainians, having the West model of economy versus government and social oppression from the East is not a hard choice to pick up.
What do you expect?
Emm… Can you specify the question, please?
In which way is Russia going to oppress Ukrainians? How will it compare to their treatment of other minorities?
You dropped a /s
Just for you to know: not every person knows/uses slang/abbreviations, so that if you want other people to understand you, use standard English, please.
Either use /s or make your sarcasm clearer.
Ahh, okay. Thanks. Will know from now the meaning of /s.
Just with these kind of topics you have to be careful. Your edit makes things even clearer.
Yeah, I figured that out. I am trying to be careful with what I am saying to avoid being checkmated on wrong facts and sometimes forget to analyze how different people may interpret my comments.