r6russian wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Apparently, Ukraine's only option is, cede its territory to Russia anytime Russia wants some. This type of dishonorable hybrid warfare is dangerous for global stability.

Russia doesnt randomly want some. All they want is the Russia aligned russian speaking east Ukraine to join Russia, and EU can have west Ukraine. Having the port in Sevastopol is obviously a military advantage, but lets not forget that Crimea is russian speaking and aligned with Russia. This is what East Ukrainian people want. We dont want to be EU, and we dont want to be aligned with the government thats owned by the western elite. So Putin is doing what eastern Ukrainians want, hes protecting russian speaking people who want to be with him, My sources? Im from east Ukraine, still have friends and family there and the opinion is just about unanimous

In civilized countries, citizens are not encouraged to change a nation's borders because they don't like the current government. Putin's propaganda and let's-take-a-vote-while-our-armed-soldiers-are-watching-you type of elections are not condoned; they are rejected by all but the most authoritarian of despots.

Indeed, Putin himself doesn't seem to think "what the people want" is so important when it comes to his cronies: witness Belarus and Syria, where his support of unpopular governments outweighs any concern for the wishes of the citizenry.

r6russian wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Apparently, Ukraine's only option is, cede its territory to Russia anytime Russia wants some. This type of dishonorable hybrid warfare is dangerous for global stability.

Russia doesnt randomly want some. All they want is the Russia aligned russian speaking east Ukraine to join Russia, and EU can have west Ukraine.

Ok, stop there. Ukraine is a sovereign country. The Putin regime has no business taking what is like, even it is isn't random. If eastern Ukraine wants to be part of Russia, fine, there is a method to do so. If Crimea wants to be part of Russian, fine, there is a procedure to do so. If Ukraine. wants to joins the EU, fine, there. is. a method to do so (although EU countries do not want that).

Even if it is true what you say and it is 'just about unanimous', it is still an act of war what the Putin regime is doing.

Some of the quotes from the Russian side are just wow!
Dmitry Kozak, on Thursday delivered a new warning to Kyiv, saying Russia might “have” to step in to defend Russian speakers in the war-torn east.
But, he added, an escalation would be “the beginning of the end of Ukraine”, describing that scenario for the ex-Soviet country as “not a shot in the leg, but in the face”.

The build up of troops comes ahead of talks on April 19.Show them your hand !

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Is it possible that this large scale military buildup is a massive bluff by Putin designed to scare Ukraine into making concessions regarding the Minsk deal ? Ukraine would know that if Russia attacked, the U.S. and the E.U. would lodge protests and threaten sanctions, but would not actually commit forces into any combat situation. And the Ukrainian military is hardly in a position to contain a massive armored assault accompanied by the full might of the Russian air force. So this could be Putin's way to finally break the deadlock on his terms.

alberchico wrote:

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Is it possible that this large scale military buildup is a massive bluff by Putin designed to scare Ukraine into making concessions regarding the Minsk deal ? Ukraine would know that if Russia attacked, the U.S. and the E.U. would lodge protests and threaten sanctions, but would not actually commit forces into any combat situation. And the Ukrainian military is hardly in a position to contain a massive armored assault accompanied by the full might of the Russian air force. So this could be Putin's way to finally break the deadlock on his terms.

I wouldn't call it a simple bluff, since the situation can develop in numerous ways. It's definitely an attempt to scare Ukraine, or at least Ukrainian leaders into making concessions. It would not work with the previous president, with the current one I am not so sure. But there are strong forces in the country that will not let him just to surrender. In Ukraine the president does not have an absolute power. Yanukovich tried to get it, but he was not very smart and too impatient, so his regime got overthrown when he yielded to Putin's pressure and did not sign the agreement with EU. The current president knows that there is always a chance of an uprising, so he will not do something that is very unpopular with the majority of Ukrainian people.
Putin is always testing the boundaries of what he can get away with. He doesn't want a full scale war, but he is getting pretty bitter and resentful, so who knows what he would do. But Ukrainian army is not what it used to be in 2014. Maybe it is not a match for the Russian army, but it has experience now, and the soldiers are battle hardened. Plus, Russia also doesn't have too many really experienced soldiers. Probably more than Ukraine does, but less than you would think, looking at the size of the Russian army.
And the US and EU will do more than just threaten sanctions, especially the US. There was an abrupt and strong turn away from Russia by the Ukrainian government since Biden administration took power. And even though I am sure that there will be no direct military help my friends who are still in Ukraine are telling me that Western military planes are landing in Ukraine all the time, unloading equipment.

Yesterday on FlightRadar24, it was possible to track a US drone over Ukraine. I'm assuming this is a deliberate move from the US army to let the russians know that they're being watched?

I have not been following this closely enough, but Russian tanks inside Ukrainian borders (excluding Crimea) would be legitimate targets for countries wanting to help Ukraine wouldn't they ? No need to declare war to Russia.

The "Russian speaking" or "passport holding" stuff doesn't hold any water in international law, unless Russia can get a UN security resolution agreed on it, that is.

BTW if they love Russia so much, the country isn't far, and there is room, it's the biggest country on the planet, with a relatively small population ! There is no reason for it to get any bigger !

Aesma wrote:

I have not been following this closely enough, but Russian tanks inside Ukrainian borders (excluding Crimea) would be legitimate targets for countries wanting to help Ukraine wouldn't they ? No need to declare war to Russia.

The "Russian speaking" or "passport holding" stuff doesn't hold any water in international law, unless Russia can get a UN security resolution agreed on it, that is.

BTW if they love Russia so much, the country isn't far, and there is room, it's the biggest country on the planet, with a relatively small population ! There is no reason for it to get any bigger !

I doubt that there will be a direct involvement of any Western military, even if Putin will go ahead with a full scale invasion. The most likely scenario in a case of Russian invasion is a blockade of Russia. As for the Russian speaking population, nobody really asked them what do they want. Some of them may be really feel strongly about being Russian, the majority just wants all this war to end, just like the majority of Ukrainians. They are just being used.
For Putin loss of Ukraine means losing the empire. And the majority of Russians also think so, even the liberal minded. There is a saying that a Russian liberal ends where the question of Ukrainian freedom begins. To put it plainly, Putin and many Russians do not think that the counties that were in the USSR are fully independent states. They still think that Russia should have a say in how these countries are run. For them it's a question of the world standing: as long as Russia has some satellite countries it is equal to the USA. In Russian online forums they routinelly call EU countries to be American vassals, and they truly believe that.

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_Protocol

If we read the Minsk 2 agreements, in particular point 4 and 9, the Ukrainian interpretation is out of the question. First elections, then starting from the next day I believe Ukraine starts assuming control of it's border.

Dogman wrote:

alberchico wrote:

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Is it possible that this large scale military buildup is a massive bluff by Putin designed to scare Ukraine into making concessions regarding the Minsk deal ? Ukraine would know that if Russia attacked, the U.S. and the E.U. would lodge protests and threaten sanctions, but would not actually commit forces into any combat situation. And the Ukrainian military is hardly in a position to contain a massive armored assault accompanied by the full might of the Russian air force. So this could be Putin's way to finally break the deadlock on his terms.

I wouldn't call it a simple bluff, since the situation can develop in numerous ways. It's definitely an attempt to scare Ukraine, or at least Ukrainian leaders into making concessions. It would not work with the previous president, with the current one I am not so sure. But there are strong forces in the country that will not let him just to surrender. In Ukraine the president does not have an absolute power. Yanukovich tried to get it, but he was not very smart and too impatient, so his regime got overthrown when he yielded to Putin's pressure and did not sign the agreement with EU. The current president knows that there is always a chance of an uprising, so he will not do something that is very unpopular with the majority of Ukrainian people.
Putin is always testing the boundaries of what he can get away with. He doesn't want a full scale war, but he is getting pretty bitter and resentful, so who knows what he would do. But Ukrainian army is not what it used to be in 2014. Maybe it is not a match for the Russian army, but it has experience now, and the soldiers are battle hardened. Plus, Russia also doesn't have too many really experienced soldiers. Probably more than Ukraine does, but less than you would think, looking at the size of the Russian army.
And the US and EU will do more than just threaten sanctions, especially the US. There was an abrupt and strong turn away from Russia by the Ukrainian government since Biden administration took power. And even though I am sure that there will be no direct military help my friends who are still in Ukraine are telling me that Western military planes are landing in Ukraine all the time, unloading equipment.

Your last point (that Ukraine's actions since Biden's election has changed greatly) is very valid. Zelensky hasn't kept any of his promises, his party failed miserably in the local elections country wide last summer (I believe), his approval ratings plummeted, he is going after the opposition, closing media (including 3 popular TV channels) critical of him this year.

It is very possible that he believes that the US will support him in some endeavour he tries in Eastern Ukraine. Would solve his problems at home, right?

Problem is that the US will obviously not get into a shooting war against Russia and this show of support can get to one's head and lead to serious consequences, just look at Georgia in 2008. Once Georgia attacked and starting getting an ass kicking the US's support changed from weapons for the Georgians to giving a ride home for the Georgian contingent in Iraq and some pathetic humanitarian goods (including toilet paper).

Also the Ukrainian army has changed since 2014, but it is still heavily demoralised and the majority has no desire to participate in this civil war.

On a related note, when the Ukrainian government seriously and openly talks about what they plan to do to the population on an official level when (more like IF) they regain control of their territories, do they actually expect people living in the Eastern Ukraine or Crimea to actually ever want to be a part of the same country ever again?

tu204 wrote:

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_Protocol

If we read the Minsk 2 agreements, in particular point 4 and 9, the Ukrainian interpretation is out of the question. First elections, then starting from the next day I believe Ukraine starts assuming control of it's border.

Ukraine should be in charge of its borders, don't you think? At the moment, the Putin regime can and does supply the rebels with anything they need to stay afloat and keep the civil war going: food, weapons, money, military aid, 'guidance etc. etc. We have seen where that leads to. Tens of thousands dead and even shooting down of a civil airliner with heavy military equipment supplied by the Russian army, thus the Putin regime.

tu204 wrote:

On a related note, when the Ukrainian government seriously and openly talks about what they plan to do to the population on an official level when (more like IF) they regain control of their territories, do they actually expect people living in the Eastern Ukraine or Crimea to actually ever want to be a part of the same country ever again?

That is not up to the Putin regime. Russia supplied tons of passports to Eastern Ukrainians in order to "rescue" it's own citizens.

If those people wanted to join the Russian federation, fine. Then Ukrainians should vote for it in fair and open elections. There is a procedure for it to do it according to international law, or are you opposed to upholding international law?

Dutchy wrote:

tu204 wrote:

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_Protocol

If we read the Minsk 2 agreements, in particular point 4 and 9, the Ukrainian interpretation is out of the question. First elections, then starting from the next day I believe Ukraine starts assuming control of it's border.

Ukraine should be in charge of its borders, don't you think?

And they will have control of their borders. Once they hold elections according to Ukranian law and the parliament passed a law on their autonomy status. As outlined in the Minsk Protocols, that Ukraine signed.
The Ukrainian regime and yourself however seem to think that signing something, where black on white it's written on what shall happen next, leaves the opportunity to not proceed with the procedure, but to make sorry excuses of why that shouldn't happen.

Why agree to it in the first place and pit your signature there if right away you have no intention of implementing what you are signing for whatever reason?!?!

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Taking Minsk agreement aside for just a second... what if the USA went to China and held elections there under our supervision in the 1950s?

What if France decided to contend for control of Massachusetts in the next election?

This logic can go in all sorts of bad directions.

tu204 wrote:

Zelensky hasn't kept any of his promises... he is going after the opposition, closing media (including 3 popular TV channels) critical of him this year.

So, what you're saying is that he's just like Putin...

tu204 wrote:

Dutchy wrote:

tu204 wrote:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_Protocol

If we read the Minsk 2 agreements, in particular point 4 and 9, the Ukrainian interpretation is out of the question. First elections, then starting from the next day I believe Ukraine starts assuming control of it's border.

Ukraine should be in charge of its borders, don't you think?

And they will have control of their borders. Once they hold elections according to Ukranian law and the parliament passed a law on their autonomy status. As outlined in the Minsk Protocols, that Ukraine signed.
The Ukrainian regime and yourself however seem to think that signing something, where black on white it's written on what shall happen next, leaves the opportunity to not proceed with the procedure, but to make sorry excuses of why that shouldn't happen.

Why agree to it in the first place and pit your signature there if right away you have no intention of implementing what you are signing for whatever reason?!?!

Leaving your cheap remarks directed to my person aside. Do you believe that the signators of the Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances should be held to the same standard you seem to lay out here?

The Minsk agreement was a stillborn child. Russia has no leg to stand on in accusing Ukraine of not implementing it. A cease fire was announced, but Russia was continuing a heavy bombardment of Debaltsevo, claiming that the cease fire does not apply to this part of the front line? Why? The full swap of the captured soldiers still was not implemented, even though both Ukrainian presidents tried it. Not to mention the separatists blocking access for the international observers from accessing border with Russia at certain times, so they could not see the equipment from Russia crossing the border.
For Ukraine implementing the Russian version of the Minsk agreement is worse than a military defeat. To claim that all Ukraine needs to do is to implement the Minsk agreement is the same as to claim that all Ukraine needs to do is to surrender.

LCDFlight wrote:

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Taking Minsk agreement aside for just a second... what if the USA went to China and held elections there under our supervision in the 1950s?

What if France decided to contend for control of Massachusetts in the next election?

This logic can go in all sorts of bad directions.

I am honestly not sure what is the point that you are trying to make.

Dogman wrote:

LCDFlight wrote:

Dogman wrote:

The problem is that Minsk agreement(s) contain several items that are interpreted differently by Russia and Ukraine. One of the most obvious is that Russia insists on Ukraine talking directly to the separatists. Given that they are completely controlled by Russia there is the only reason why Russia wants it: to claim that they are powerless to do certain things, because the "independent" republics are not agreeing to it. Also, Ukraine insists on gaining control over the border with Russia first before having elections in the currently occupied territories, while Russia wants elections first, and after the election the border control will be implemented by the forces controlled by and loyal to the local government, which in turn will be controlled by Russia. Minsk agreement will never be implemented. It was conceived when the situation on the front line came to a point when no side knew how to proceed and needed a break to re-asses the situation and design a new plan of actions.

Taking Minsk agreement aside for just a second... what if the USA went to China and held elections there under our supervision in the 1950s?

What if France decided to contend for control of Massachusetts in the next election?

This logic can go in all sorts of bad directions.

I am honestly not sure what is the point that you are trying to make.

My point is that there are zones of many countries that are not loyal to the central government. This can be discovered if a more powerful country goes in and decides to hold an "election" to "free" those people. This is a technique that can be used in lots of places. And America has done it plenty of times. Now, Russia does it. But, that doesn't make it okay. It is an invasion. It is an act of war.

LCDFlight wrote:

My point is that there are zones of many countries that are not loyal to the central government. This can be discovered if a more powerful country goes in and decides to hold an "election" to "free" those people. This is a technique that can be used in lots of places. And America has done it plenty of times. Now, Russia does it. But, that doesn't make it okay. It is an invasion. It is an act of war.

It's a standard imperial practice: move the people from a different region to a new place, so they will be fighting the locals, and there will be less chance that they will rebel against the Empire as a united force. In case of Donbass region of Ukraine a lot of Russians had been moved there after millions of Ukrainians died as a result of the famine in 1933. Russia is trying to use them as a wedge to split Ukraine. It does not really case about them, no matter what Russian apologists are claiming here or elsewhere.

Seems like things are cooling down a little. Russian Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu has ordered a number of units in the area back to their bases.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-56842763

""The troops have demonstrated their ability to provide a credible defence for the country," Hmmm.