French President Emmanuel Macron has said that Russia’s security concerns when it comes to NATO expansion need to be taken into account in any future peace talks and that the West needs to be prepared to give Moscow guarantees.
“We need to prepare what we are ready to do, how we protect our allies and member states, and how to give guarantees to Russia the day it returns to the negotiating table,” the French leader said in an interview that aired Saturday.
“One of the essential points we must address — as President Putin has always said — is the fear that NATO comes right up to its doors, and the deployment of weapons that could threaten Russia,” Macron added.
Any future peace deal between Russia and Ukraine would require a guarantee that Kyiv will remain neutral and won’t join NATO. Russia made the demand during the lead-up to the invasion, but the US refused to make the promise. Last week, NATO doubled down on its pledge that Ukraine will eventually join the alliance.
Macron’s comments drew an angry response from Ukraine. Mykhailo Podolyak, an advisor to President Volodymyr Zelensky, said security guarantees for Moscow would only be possible “after tribunal, conviction of war authors and war criminals” and the “imposition of large-scale reparations.”
Unlike President Biden, Macron has maintained contact with Russian President Vladimir Putin since February. During his visit to Washington last week, where the interview that aired Saturday was recorded, Macron said that he would keep talking with Putin to “try to prevent escalation and to get some very concrete results.”
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz has also favored maintaining contacts with Russia and spoke with Putin on Friday. According to the Kremlin, Putin told Scholz that the Western approach to Ukraine was “destructive” and that Germany should rethink the policy.
Hundreds of thousands dead, a ton of Ukraine destroyed including half of the Ukrainian economy, and 10% inflation for the western world, and we are literally back to Russia’s basic demand that Ukraine stay neutral. Why on earth did Biden refused to compromise on that to avoid all of this? History will remember him as an inflexible warmonger that led to this war.
Because, as I suspect you already know, war, the splitting off of Russia from Europe, the destruction, inflation, de-industrialization of Europe, and the rest were the objectives all along. It’s been a splendid little war for the weapons makers and the US hydrocarbon folks and many others … absolutely splendid.
And at the insignificant cost of the blood and wealth of those millions superfluities
Un-healthy cynicism…
Realism, I’d say … It’s unhealthy to underestimate the perversity of the Complex.
“war” was the “objective all along”?
Not necessarily. I’d argue win-win brinkmanship.
Russia tolerates Ukraine in NATO? Another militarized client state to spend on, another belligerent, Russophobe East European government to tip the NATO scale on the side of the US’s domination of NATO.
Russia does not tolerate Ukraine in NATO – or NATO de facto in Ukraine? Even more US military spending supported by a localized, endless hot war…no prob’, so long as that war can be confined to young Ukrainian and Russian men.
My guess is that History won’t remember any of this, as there simply won’t be any future historians, just survivors stumbling through the wreckage of WWIII. No more USA, no more Russia. Zionism wins again.
“Zionism wins again”?
Advance thanks for supporting an otherwise worthless claim – the deeper causes have to do w/30 years of US-driven NATO expansion following – but in extension of – the Cold War.
You forget that most Zionists in the USA are so-called Christian, 50 million of them, including both Biden and Trump. These folks have a collective hard-on for Armageddon and nothing short of WWIII will get them off.
“‘Zionists in the USA…including…Biden…have a collective hard-on for Armageddon and nothing short of WWIII will get them off.”
Biden rejected ‘closing the sky’ over Ukraine because – correctly – he said, “That means the willingness to shoot down Russian aircraft, and that would mean World War III.”
No, Biden is waiting for the Zionist entity to come up with the horrible false-flag event that will force the USA into a catastrophic war with Russia.
“Biden is wai-”
like he wouldna just blown up the world when he could if he was eager for wwiii as you assert – wwiii is wwiii, it’s the end, who the fuck cares if it’s ‘close the skies’ or ‘false flag’ if that’s what you want
what? ‘no, cause wwiii and the end of the world can only happen the zionist way, cause they’ve got their specific plan, see, for the end of the world, that all the other world leader crypto-zionists haveta obey’?
yr some kinda ‘global zionist conspiracy’ nut – good job giving neocons ammo to discredit antiwar folks with
Advance thanks for supporting an otherwise worthless claim.
All of the doomsday movies,books and predictions are happening quickly before our eyes while the various countries and governments stick their heads in the sand while watching the planet and civilization collapse.This does not have a happy ending.
Its all about profits,arms sales and world domination.The US can not afford to have multilateral agreements or peace in our time.Without Capitalist and Imperialism the US has nothing to offer.
“Without Crony Capitalism and Imperialism the US has nothing to offer.”
There, fixed it for you.
I hope your underestimation of inflation will carry over to your estimations of American/NATO successes in Ukraine on the ground to reach parity with reality.
Hundreds of thousands dead, a ton of Ukraine destroyed including half of the Ukrainian economy, and 10% inflation for the western world, and we are literally back to Russia’s basic demand that Ukraine stay neutral. Why on earth did Biden refused to compromise on that to avoid all of this? History will remember him as an inflexible warmonger that led to this war.
Talk is cheap, I am all for it.
Humorous?…
Kinda, I can see pooty waving about a bit of paper and telling the Russian people that thsi document guarantees peace in out time. Isn’t one of the animating principles of this whole fiasco that the West “lied” so what sort of a comedown is necessary for him to now accept our lies?
At least if he has an official signed document to wave this time, the excuse that the “not one inch eastward” statement was never official policy won’t be able to get used again.
This ship has sailed. NATO has broken that promise and Russia just need to buy time to prepare for the eventuality.
Agreed. The culture is corrupt, the economy hollow, and the dollar sinking. The only hope of western capitalism lies in war.
Macron’s comments drew an angry response from Ukraine. Mykhailo Podolyak, an advisor to President Volodymyr Zelensky, said security guarantees for Moscow would only be possible “after tribunal, conviction of war authors and war criminals” and the “imposition of large-scale reparations.”
Actually, the linked tweet is even worse. It is not security gurantees for Moscow that was referred to, but for the Ukraine and its allies:
Civilized world needs “security guarantees” from barbaric intentions of post-Putin Russia…It will be possible only after tribunal, conviction of war authors and war criminals, imposition of large-scale reparations and bloody clarification of ru-elites “who is the one to blame?”
Russia, in the view of this person, has no claim to security guaranteees, at all, ever, even after, in his hypothetical future, Russia has bowed down to Holy Ukraine, kissed its ass, paid it untold billions of dollars, and sent its own leaders to the Hague for punishment, to the extent that such leaders have not been “bloody clarified” instead. At that point, security gurantees flowing the other way, from Russia to the Ukraine and its backers, will be “possible,”
Notice too that the Ukraine and its allies, of course, constitute the “civilized world,” as opposed to the Russian “barbarians.” The racist mindset could not be more obvious. The officials of the Kiev-based entity are not merely intrasigent war mongers, but are also outright racial supremacists.
In short, Nazis.
dunno ’bout the last – demonization of enemy as inherently barbaric a common trope of war – helpful to the act of killing another human being to conceive of him as an inhuman monster – those ‘orcs’ that symbolized nazi hordes in tolkien. and negotiate a settlement with wholly cruel primitive aggressive beasts? – seriously?
Garantees my ass. What country not totally insane would believe one word the Us Government says too anyone startingb with the Native Americans long ago or more recently their history with labor unions and the promises made to the working class. This country has been governed by thieves and liars since its incepti0n.Why would they change a winning formula?
Both nuclear superpowers will go to war to defend vital interests – even nuclear war – the one they genuinely would prefer to avoid. They must heed the warning of history: the war powers are trying to avoid is the one they eventually get.
https://patternofhistory.wordpress.com/
There is by now a very low chance of this escalating to a nuclear war – this because the west has absolutely nothing to gain from getting directly involved and Russia has much to lose from using nukes – i.e. I believe the Russian pundits that they would not use nukes in Ukraine.
“There is by now a very low chance of this escalating to a nuclear war – this because the west has absolutely nothing to gain from getting directly involved and Russia has much to lose from using nuke-”
That isn’t the nuclear threshold scenario US spokespersons have testified about in Congress.
But thanks for that expert counter-analysis – evidently, you know better.
And I am sure I speak for many Americans – who support the US’s arms-only-no-negotiation foreign policy – when I write that I feel safer – relieved, really – knowing the deaths will be mainly confined to young Ukrainian and Russian men “for as long as it takes.”
Did I say it was the nuclear threshold? All I said was that they had no incentive to to get directly involved and hence no reason to use nukes first.
Do you actually expect the US to use nukes in the event that Russia (not using nukes) win in Ukraine?????
OK sounds callous.
“Did I say it was the nuclear threshold? All I sai-”
“nuclear threshold scenario” – yr either over-fixating on 1 word, or having trouble comprehending the concept – surprising, given yr expertise
Did you miss the point that the US would not use nukes if there were no incentives to do so???
It is the stated policy of both Washington and Moscow to initiate the use of nukes in certain circumstances. They may convince themselves they can avoid the scenario, with the comfort of normalcy bias. If there is one warning from history that needs to heeded, it is: every empire has eventually faced the war it was trying to avoid (and never thought it would get).
The Russian policy actually being the most restrictive – i.e. they have constrained themselves to only using nukes (first) if their state is at threat of being crushed – (so tanks at the gate of Moscow) or their ability to fire their nuclear missiles at threat (so cut communication or the units being taken out by e.g. conventional forces. (or if attacked by nukes)
Neither seems even remotely likely – or do you think that the Ukrainians would have this capability – because I certainly do not.
The US/NATO would (likely) only use nukes if they were being overwhelmed on the battlefield in NATO countries – seeing as their strategy is to avoid being directly involved (because that is about the only way they believe they could possibly lose) I do not see this happening either.
That as I see it leaves us with the risk of war by accident – a risk that has been getting smaller and smaller for the west as we get better and better at preventing misidentification of missile launches – the threat of this could go up if the hypersonic missiles were more numerous and had longer range though – so lower risk of a western initiated nuclear war by accident.
The Russians are also unlikely to start a nuclear war by accident – we know from prior examples that they have at least twice before taken the wise approach of waiting to confirm when the protocol actually called for nuclear weapons to be deployed – I do not think we should make monsters of the Russians they are in general not insane people hoping for a chance to end the world – so fairly reluctant to push the red button.
“We need to prepare what we are ready to do, how we protect our allies and member states, and how to give guarantees to Russia the day it returns to the negotiating table,” the French leader said in an interview that aired Saturday.
That must have clenched a few sphincters in Washington. Macron won’t be using the executive bathroom on his next visit.
Time for both sides to creep toward the off ramp while emitting blood curdling threats.
Macron has assumed a role of a court jester. He cqn say things. and when the outcome is peasing to the King, he gets acvolades, but when a King is displeased gets punishment, Jester’s lufe is precarious. The moods of hegemon swing violently.
Are you proposing that he will go like Belarus foreign minister Makei? I think that Macron is very safe compared to Putin’s ‘friends’
Indeed. Negotiations with those that think terms are only binding on the other side are futile.
Yet no mainstream western media seems willing to even repeat what France’s leader says is necessary for peace, his words are only referred to in order to repeat the scoffs intransigence and demands of the usual suspects who hate diplomacy and love war.
There are no minimumgoals achieved by either side to consider peace. And there is no treashold of pain reached on either sude to consider peace.
Stories of Russia’s military losing people , running out of ammunition, will to live — are just that stories. Stories do not win wars. Russisn populace was angry ever since 2014 and the coup that resukted in prosecution, abuse and military solutions to Rusdian population of Ukraine. Leadership was slliw to come aboard. Russians are slow to anger.
“Macron: Security Guarantees for Russia Needed for Future Peace Deal”
Ukrainian Security: ‘Da’ Macron sleeps wit’ da’ fish…’
“Macron has said that Russia’s security concerns when it comes to NATO expansion need to be taken into account in any future peace talks and that the West needs to be prepared to give Moscow guarantees.“
Breaking News: Homer Simpson Head Slap Heard Round the World
Seismologists yesterday reported that a literally earthshaking, exasperated howl of, ‘Doh! Now he comes out with it!‘ was picked up in global seismological monitoring networks on all seven continents, apparently in simultaneous reaction to the French President’s belated admission in a war whose deepest causes lie in relentless, US-driven NATO expansion.
As I told you just recently the US cannot drive NATO expansion, countries have to apply and qualify like having to be democratic and even then they have to have the approval of all the existing members – so e.g. Sweden and Finland are still not members because the Turks have still not agreed to them joining.
“As I told you just re-”
others will form views from the thread – english not being yr first language, you might haveta lk up the word tarbaby
Just being a jerk will not get you out of this deliberate attempt at painting the US as the primary force behind NATO getting new members – it is just a lie. English being my first language or not does not change the simple dynamics i.e. to get to be a member a country has to apply, qualify and meet with the approval of all existing members – only in the last part of that process can the US actually wield its power – and as the case of Sweden and Finland has shown that power is rather limited.
How can the West keep accepting the demands of the Zelnskyyy régime and not realize that Russia actually does live next door to a fanatical reckless band of vicious murderous liars (the Uke government) sending hundreds of thousands of their countrymen (and women) into certain death in the forlorn hope that they can somehow change history and geography? Russia explained last year- it is there, cannot retreat, and NATO has decided Russia is an enemy to be destroyed. This is an existential issue for Russia, while the US/NATO is fighting for hubris- overweening pride and desire to remain the boss.
yea – russia sees the govt. of the country next door in a hot war w/the russian-oriented ukrainians on russia’s border – w/US weapons and personnel pouring in…and THIS is the country the US declares it’s gonna NATO-ize?
Russia doesn’t need any security guarantees. Neither NATO nor Ukraine have any desire to invade Russia. What Russia wants is guarantees that the West will let them expand its territorial borders any time they want and to be allowed to have Natural Gas and Grain monopoly in the region at the expense of its neighbors (i.e. Ukraine, Kazakhstan).
Perhaps you only feign cluelessness, who knows. But to think that the only security threat to Russia is a physical invasion points to an intellect in serious need of upgrading to something past the 18th century at the least.
NATO expanding eastward until reaching Ukraine, followed by a coup in that country and a rise in anti-Russia sentiment. By all means Russia should listen to Don Julio’s guarantees.
Most often it’s not borders that are expanded but influence, most of it bought off. For example, the Ukrainian Dictator’s perpetual money flow to use as he sees fit.
Tell that to Gadaffi. Oh, you can’t. He was deposed and murdered.
For F ‘s sake, Russians have been TOLD what the end game is. Do you think they weren’t paying attention?
I suggest you look and listen to the Youtube video of the Munk Debate between John Mearsheimer, Stephen Walt, vs. Radislov Sikorski and Michael McFaul. McFaul, former Ambassador to Russia, lets the cat out of the bag about our lying to other nations. It’s a really good debate.
There are still adults in Europe, adults who tread very lightly in the presence of the monster to the west, but adults nonetheless. I don’t envy them the shadow they have to walk beneath every day.
They have the unenviable task of protecting their populations while trying to retain a semblance of integrity and dignity.
Real peace requires regime change in Washington DC. I don’t mean one party or the other, I mean wholesale cleanout of The Blob from the permanent government that uses both parties to do the same warmongering.
“peace requires regime change in Washington DC…I mean wholesale cleanout of The Blob”
Look, don’t get carried away here, bud – cause if yr suggesting Victoria Nuland and her partner’s heads get paraded through DC’s streets on pikes by roaring mobs? Or dragged from the back of a jeep like Mussolini and his mistress?
Uh-uh. No thank you, sir. That is where I get off. Hood over the head and hung by the neck until dead, just like any other common Hague war criminal. Sometimes the old ways are best.
An obvious solution. How to get it done is obviously nearly impossible.