- cross-posted to:
- europa@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- europa@lemmy.world
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy dismissed Saturday the planned summit between U.S. President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin, warning that any peace deal excluding Kyiv would lead to “dead solutions.”
The meeting, scheduled for Friday in Alaska, is seen as a potential breakthrough after weeks of expressing frustration that more was not being done to quell the fighting.
In a statement posted to Telegram, Zelenskyy said Ukraine’s territorial integrity, enshrined in the constitution, must be non-negotiable and emphasized that lasting peace must include Ukraine’s voice at the table.
Zelenskyy said Ukraine “will not give Russia any awards for what it has done” and that “Ukrainians will not give their land to the occupier.”
Touching on Ukrainian anxieties that a direct meeting between Putin and Trump could marginalize Kyiv and European interests, Zelenskyy said: “Any solutions that are without Ukraine, are at the same time solutions against peace. They will not bring anything. These are dead solutions, they will never work.”
You must log in or # to comment.
This would only be a pause for Putin. He never honors treaties.
Not in defence of him as he is total scum, but no-one else does either. Remember in 94 when us and uk promised Ukraine protection for ceding their nukes?
There’s a lesson here: never give up your nukes.
The UK sent a lot of goods, so did the USA.
Your point is that they aren’t doing enough?
Yes. Sending goods isn’t protection.
And especially not when the US keeps threatening to take away all those goods for trumped-up reasons.
Well yes it is IMO. They can and should do more ofc.
They were never guaranteed “protection”.
Yes, they were. It was the whole reason they gave up their nukes.
No, they were guaranteed “security assurance”.
And we failed to assure their security. Assurance = guarantee in legalese.
Horseshit. GTFO with this vatniki talking point.
The phrase “security guarantees” was specifically excluded. The phrase “security assurance” was a distinction made by the US State Dept lawyers for this exact reason; it makes clear the US is not a guarantor. This has been well known since the signing so no misunderstanding here is reasonable. That is just your distortion of the facts.
Go read the full text of the Budapest Memorandum and then come back and provide a specific citation. I’ll be here waiting.
Ok, so we still failed to assure their security.
Btw, assurance and guarantee are synonymous legally. Assurance is the legal term for a guarantee.
I’m not convinced that a minor linguistic distinction is valid proof that Ukraine was not promised protection of its territorial sovereignty.
All I read in that article is author’s weird interpretation backed only by the fact that all the countries that signed it chose to ignore it when russia started the war in 2014.
Yeah, sounds like a lot of lawyer weaseling that amounts to “yes we agreed to help you, but technically we don’t have to, so go fuck yourselves.”
The distinction between “guarantee” and “assurance” is pretty unimportant when it comes to the Budapest Memorandum – the main problem is that all points are just “reaffirmations of commitment”, and the UK, US and RF "reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security action […] if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression […] in which nuclear weapons are used.
There was never any guarantee, assurance, promise or even just pretension to secure Ukraine against a conventional, non-nuclear aggression. Just well worded empty phrases.
You conveniently removed the part where threat of nukes also triggers this commitment.
"Seek immediate Security Council action to provide assistance to the signatory if they "should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used".
Why conveniently? Has Moskow ever threatened Ukraine with nukes? I only ever heard unofficial comments that Europe and the US should be afraid of The Mighty Russian Nuklear Force if they dare to ramp up their support for Ukraine.
My point is that the Budapest memorandum was a scam - it does not offer any protection against non-nuclear aggression or threat thereof and offers only the protection of the UNSC in case of nuclear aggression or threat thereof. But the UNSC cannot protect against one of it’s veto powers by design, so even in the case of nuclear aggression or threat thereof this memorandum would not work if the UK, the US, the RF, France or China were the aggressor. Israel would likely be backed by the US, North Korea by China, so this memorandum boils down to a pinky promise that the UNSC would express it’s dissatisfaction if India or Pakistan attacks Ukraine with nuclear weapons. Or threatens to do so.
The link is my reply. Did you extra conveniently miss it?
We did provide assistance!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
Jesus christ stop repeating Russian propaganda people!
I think it’s very clear to any non-idiot who in this thread is spewing russian propaganda.
It’s not a minor linguistic distinction. They literally were not promised protection of their territorial sovereignty. They were promised military intervention if Russia used nukes, and security assurances if Russia used military force but not nukes. This was made repeatedly clear to all signatories.
And we’ve all been sending military aid and funding to Ukraine since 2014.
That’s two myths:
-
That Ukraine was “promised protection” in exchange for giving up its nukes - it wasn’t.
-
That Ukraine was ignored after Russia invaded in 2014 - it wasn’t.
I suggest you take some time to read what we’ve actually been doing since 2014:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_military_aid_to_Ukraine_during_the_Russo-Ukrainian_War
And then maybe post some links of your own as to where you’re getting these false ideas, probably Russian propaganda I presume?
-
It’s not even that. The current Russian economy would collapse under peace. It’s just more maskirovka, and only Trump hasn’t realised that.
Putin can honour the only treaty of life - death will arrive for him eventually.
How about a compromise: Russia gets the entire fuck out of Ukraine, and in exchange they can have Alaska. Seems fair.
Aged like wine!
Crimea is Ukraine.
Crimea is a subset of Ukraine.
Yes, I’m aware. FYI, the phrase is a common slogan in Ukrainian, since 2014.
Volodymyr, we just talked with my good friend Vladimir and decided that Ukrainians should completely leave four oblasts to finally stop this senseless war. And everyone’s gonna be happy - Ukraine finally gets it’s peace, Russia finally gets it’s landgrab.
And yeah, prepare a couple other oblasts, in case Vlad gets the munchies again eh
If some fucker breaks into your house, kicks your dog, rapes your wife and steals your TV, you don’t ’compromise’ to let him keep the TV. You shoot that fucker right between the eyes.
Russia needs to get out, simple as that. After that, we’ll hang Putin for war crimes and put the rest of Russian leadership against a fucking wall.
We should not be signing trade deals with countries that sell out Ukraine, we should instead massively tax their tech companies and try to pop their AI bubble.
Good! Must include Kyiv!
Child rapist taco man trying everything to focus the attention everywhere but on the Epstein files. Crazy that Ukraine has to fight Russia and the US almost totally alone. I’m with the people of 🇺🇦
