Archived

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.”

  • FinishingDutch@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    ·
    21 hours ago

    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.

  • GraniteM@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    24 hours ago

    How about a compromise: Russia gets the entire fuck out of Ukraine, and in exchange they can have Alaska. Seems fair.

  • SpaceShort@feddit.uk
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    23 hours ago

    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.

    • Mirror Giraffe@piefed.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      24
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      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?

        • daq@lemmy.sdf.org
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          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.

          • dalekcaan@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            1 day ago

            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.”

          • Kornblumenratte@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            4
            ·
            1 day ago

            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.

          • yucandu@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 day ago

            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:

            1. That Ukraine was “promised protection” in exchange for giving up its nukes - it wasn’t.

            2. 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?

      • Valmond@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        9
        ·
        1 day ago

        The UK sent a lot of goods, so did the USA.

        Your point is that they aren’t doing enough?

          • Stovetop@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            11
            ·
            1 day ago

            And especially not when the US keeps threatening to take away all those goods for trumped-up reasons.

              • higgsboson@piefed.social
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                6
                ·
                edit-2
                1 day ago

                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.

    • ℍ𝕂-𝟞𝟝@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 day ago

      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.

    • Taalnazi@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 day ago

      Putin can honour the only treaty of life - death will arrive for him eventually.

  • tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    20 hours ago

    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 🇺🇦

  • mgnome@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    26
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    1 day ago

    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.

    • Valmond@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 day ago

      And yeah, prepare a couple other oblasts, in case Vlad gets the munchies again eh