Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Wednesday said that any “peace plan” for the war in Ukraine must involve the territories Russia has annexed joining the Russian Federation.
“There can be no peace plan for Ukraine that does not take into account today’s realities regarding Russian territory, with the entry of four regions into Russia. Plans that do not take these realities into account cannot be peaceful,” Peskov said.
Russia formally annexed the territory it controls in Kherson, Zaporizhzhia, and the breakaway Donbas republics of Donetsk and Luhansk (DPR and LPR) after holding referendums, which Ukraine and the US denounced as shams.
Ukrainian President Voldymr Zelensky has been pushing a “peace plan” that involves Russia withdrawing from all the territory it has captured, including Crimea, which Russia has controlled since 2014. Zelensky’s terms and Peskov’s comments demonstrate how far apart the two sides are when it comes to a potential negotiated settlement.
For their part, Russia maintains that it’s open to talks with Ukraine and its Western backers, while Kyiv has unrealistic demands as preconditions for talks. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmytro Kuleba said this week that talks could only happen after Russia faces war crimes tribunals.
Kuleba said Ukraine is hoping for a “peace summit” to be hosted by the UN soon, but he doesn’t want Russia to attend. While there’s little hope for peace talks, the US continues to escalate support for Kyiv, and there’s no end in sight to the fighting in Ukraine.
This is a sticky wicket, as the British say… Russia cannot be in and out at the same time. Some kind of functional talks need to happen between all sides involved….
Russia does not want a peace plan, they want a Ukraine surrender plan.
Surrender equals peace.
But also ethnical cleansing as in the murder of those who do not embrace being Russian and reject their Ukrainian nationality.
I’m sending you a cyber hug. 🙂
So does death.
Amen. How else rid us (NATO) and them of Nazis.
How about clearing out some of the Nazis from the Kremlin? Starting with the little guy sitting alone at the end of the big table.
Honestly, Z believes he is the Emperor of All He Yaks At. He believes he is still president in a TV comedy and is playing to the applause of the laugh track. So far he has been getting it.
So from this:
You extract that it is Zelenskyy who is acting like an Emperor!?
If there is any nation acting like an empire then surely you have missed out on the obvious candidate:
And you do not get it. Zelenski wants tge land but has declared the population undesirable! Seriously, if the rule you believe in — my country my rules — than Hitler was right. Zelenski cannot deprive Russian speakers of their rights as human beings, cannot eliminate their right to bilingual country, cannot take their property, cannot send death squads to kill and disapoear people, cannot take away their retirements, bank acciunts and leave them destitute.
This treatment may work in Israel against Palestinians as there is nobody to stand up for them.
Here, if Zelenski representing “his” Ukraine feels like those Christian Orthodix have to go, leaving all their prooerty to “his” Ukraine he is sadly mistaken. There are FOUR mire regions that would gladly tommorow leave “his” Ukraine. Vast majority of population of Mykolaevo, Kharkiv, Dnyepropetrovsk and Odessa would vote tommowow to go.
But Russia is giving Ukraine a chance to change its laws and restore rights sna safety of Russian speakers, If not — war continues until barbarians are out of power and actorvZelwnski back to auditioning for a job.
Let us get real.
We are cheering for a Nazi state — Nazi in words and deeds. They made people suffer, Kiev provoked the war by cruelty to Russian speakers. War was desirable, from
NATO perspective as US had to bring Germany down a peg or two. War was needed in order to economically squeeze Russia. It was needed to diminish Russia and then deal with upstarts in Middle East and Asia — China primarily.
Let us see if provoking this so desirable war
brings about those outcomes.
It serms that Russia has already reached conclusion that Kiev does not want Russia speakers and has taken 4 regions. If Kiev does not change policies – other four will go, At that point only Kiev will remain Ukraine, as West Ukraine shoukd gmeither get independence or go to Poland.
The issue with your narrative is that the people of the Zaporizhzhia, Kherson, (and even Luhansk and Donetsk) are/were not majority Russian populated – nor did they want to be Russian. I ought to tell you that Hitler’s rule was not ,y country my rules but much more the rule Putin is trying to enforce in Ukraine – as Hitler too invaded e.g. Sudetenland in Czechoslovakia to protect ethnic the German’s rights.
This should not work anywhere not for Putin in Ukraine nor for Israel in Palestine – you have I hope noticed that Palestine is not Israel!?
You conflate being Christian Orthodox with being not Ukrainian – this too is wrong – and Zelenskyy has no problem with people of the Christian Orthodox faith, but with the Russian Orthodox church organization – not the faith.
Your evidence for this being the massive support for the Russians when they invaded and the sad scenes when they were forced to leave or the large protests in these areas? Just asking because what we have seen is concerted resistance against the Russians and demonstration against them as the entered but celebrations when they were liberated by the Ukrainians (in the areas where they had the Russians ‘visiting’ that is).
If you have any evidence to support your claim please link it, if you doubt my assertions here just say so I’ll happily dig up the links to the videos showing the case for these claims.
Well you are Hitler invaded Czechoslovakia to annex Sudetenland – Putin invaded to annex – Putin did a very Hitler inspired job in Chechnya too and later Georgia – all Ukraine has done is to fight a Russian supported insurrection in parts of Luhansk and Donetsk. More importantly that fight had quieted down very significantly by 2016 and since – Putin has killed more civilian ethnic Russians in the Donbas than would have been killed in 100 years of conflict as it was going on between 2019 and 2021.
Do you have any documentation for any elevation of mistreatment by the Ukrainian government of Russian speakers during the Zelenskyy administration prior to the Russian build up for the SMO?
Germany most certainly was not prepared for the conflict, but to claim that Biden chose the timing would be to ignore that it came right upon the Afghan debacle so at a time where it would be more difficult to get people in the US eager for more foreign adventures – so your theory that this was timed by the US is not plausible.
Why Russia was doing pretty badly in 2021 so why would it be the opportune moment to provoke a conflict?
This could be right – but would be somewhat of a gamble – as it could easily backfire if the Europeans not impressed by the Afghan debacle decided that this was not a threat they wanted to take seriously – as it happens the Europeans saw this as more of a threat than the Americans (who might as you suggest see this as more of an opportunity to show Xi that they are willing to take an economic conflict with even a major player).
Not to worry – Russia will not be able to keep the parts of Ukraine it has occupied since 2021 the question is if they will be able to hold on to Crimea. More importantly to most Russians I would argue is whether they would want to – because holding on to any of Ukraine will come at the cost of a lot of the convenience products and wealth that they have come to like.
Great points, Michael but you aren’t going anywhere with Bianca. She is 100% pro Russia/Putin. Her views are set.
Some people are just PRO-PEACE.
Yes there are, those people usually do not call one side in a conflict Nazi’s and compare then to Hitler – those are not the words of someone who is just PRO-PEACE.
“We are cheering for a Nazi state — Nazi in words and deeds.”
Well, maybe you should stop doing that.
it is apparent to me from Bianca’s words, that when she said “we are cheering for a nazi state”, that by “we” she was referring to uncle sam, and not herself nor her friends.
The Crimea issue was crucial for Russia. The use of the port of Sevastopol by the Russian navy was critical for Russia but it was based on a kind of lease contract which Ukraine was not obliged to renew.
So that justified invading and annexing?
Unless Russia brings down Maxwell’s Silver Hammer there will never be Peace:
There is plenty of room for all parties to compromise and talk. Ukraine needs to give up some territory and, that’s a given. Start talking.
These areas could have been in Ukraine with a modest form of self-government. Or am I wrong?
You’re right. The Donbas republics could have remained in Ukraine if the provisions of Minsk II had been met and maintained. And before this year, annexation of the other two oblasts wasn’t even under consideration.
Crimea and The Donbas Republics could have remained in Ukraine if Russia had honored the Budapest Memorandum.
You should get over your obsession with the Budapest Memorandum, Don. Only Russophobes don’t understand that the Maidan coup and the subsequent rampage by the Banderists nullified it and made it irrelevant. Also rather obviously, the parties’ agreements in Minsk made it perfectly clear that all recognized that Budapest was dead.
Just give it up. It’s silly and boring.
No, the Minsk deal was a ceasefire agreement and nowhere in it did it say that it nullified the Budapest Memorandum. You are just repeating what the Russians are saying. I don’t have an obsession with the BM, that was an agreement that Russia violated, period.
And the Maidan coup happened because Putin made Yanuckovich sell his country to him. The Banderites had nothing to do with this. This was a people of Ukraine coup to get their country back and away from the Russia sphere of influence.
Give it up? Get out of here with that BS. That’s what Putin and his followers want Ukraine and the world to do.
You should be the one giving up your blind support for Putin masked under a subtle effort to try to come across as objective in your positions.
Clearly Russia and the Russian speakers in the Donbas disagree.
What was the very first thing the coup plotters did ?
They went after their Russian speaking citizens who demured from joining this brave new project.
The coup plotters felt they could
ignore / abuse 40% of the population
because Russia was a joke.
No one is laughing now though.
The Budapest Memorandum was as
sacrosanct as the Iran JCPOA was.
Like it or not Russia is still a “Great Power” and Great Powers
need to be respected.
The road to hell, it is said, is paved with good intentions. I know you probably have good intentions, Don, but the road that proceeds from the deep misunderstandings and fundamentally-flawed judgment you share with so many in the brainwashed West is paved with the bodies of many thousands of Ukrainians, millions of refugees and the wreckage of much of their country. And it’s almost certainly too late to stop it before it gets even worse.
Well said, well said.
What nullified the BM was the Maidan coupe instigated by the US ( the role of the West was admitted to by Victoria Nuland ). The first violation of the agreement was also by the US in 2013 with its sanctions on Belarus… You just cant trust the Yanks – ask any Native American.
The phrasing in this article suggests confusion about Russia’s position on the two annexed oblasts. As far as the Russians are concerned, they have already joined the Russian Federation. They are Russia.
There are four supposedly annexed oblasts, not two.
The Russian Federation will likely be able to gain and maintain control of two of them (Donetsk and Luhansk).
The other two are going to be a difficult climbdown for Putin and Co.
There are two. The Donbas republics had been considered by the majority of their residents as independent, not as Ukrainian oblasts, since 2014. The Kremlin recognized their independence just before the February invasion. Whatever anyone else thinks about it, that’s what the evidence indicates the people of the Donbas think and I have no reason to think otherwise.
As I have said previously, I think it is unlikely in the extreme that Russia will be willing to surrender the left-bank territory of Zaporizhzhia and Kherson and I don’t think anyone can force it to surrender that territory without an escalation that might well engulf all of Europe, at least. Should Putin’s government somehow agree to give up that territory, the regime change so many in the West desire would be very high on the list of possible consequences. Those Wishers of the West should be careful what they wish for.
The Russian regime doesn’t have to be “willing to surrender” Kherson and Zaporizhzia. They’re going to walk out, run out, or be carried out of those two oblasts (possibly excepting a narrow land corridor in the latter) whether they’re “willing” or not.
Are they? Why don’t you share with us the events you expect to lead to one of those three exits?
The exit I expect is the “walk out” option, which seems to be well under way at the moment.
The “partial mobilization” has not resulted in any kind of general offensive or, the Belarus bluff meeting notwithstanding, another feint at Kyiv.
That means that the conscripts are most likely being fed into Donetsk/Luhansk to secure them and set up a defensible line of control for the remaining Russian troops in Kherson and Zaporizhia oblasts (possibly excepting a coastal corridor) to withdraw to so that Putin can declare “victory.”
Why would you expect a general offensive on some timetable? That doesn’t appear, at all, to be the sort of war Russia is fighting.
As for the notion that Russia would spend months calling up and putting hundreds of thousands of reserves through refresher training only to use them to cover a withdrawal for which they would hardly need such reinforcement . . . it sounds preposterous to me.
Anyway, as I’ve said, withdrawing from the annexed territory and leaving the civilians there to the tender mercies of Kiev’s “filtration” units would be more likely than almost anything I can think of to trigger a very unpleasant regime change in Moscow and probably very, very unpleasant consequences for the region and beyond.
“Why would you expect a general offensive on some timetable? That doesn’t appear, at all, to be the sort of war Russia is fighting.”
True. The question is whether it’s because they’re not capable of doing so, or because they don’t want to do so. The fact that after ten months they’ve still not been able to secure Donetsk strongly indicates the former.
“As for the notion that Russia would spend months calling up and putting hundreds of thousands of reserves through refresher training only to use them to cover a withdrawal for which they would hardly need such reinforcement . . . it sounds preposterous to me.”
Me too. Which is why I didn’t make any such preposterous assertion. The purpose of the “partial mobilization” isn’t to “cover the withdrawal” into DPR/LPR/land corridor. It’s to secure the DPR/LPR/land corridor. The purpose of the other forces continuing their desultory fight for, and slow withdrawal from, the territory that they partially took but could not hold (Kherson/Zaporizhia) is to buy time for the mobilized forces to maybe let Putin come out of this with something other than full body bags.
I agree that it was politically stupid for Putin to pretend to annex the occupied territory in Kherson and Zaporizhia, and that having to abandon it will cost him domestically.
Should the Russians cede any territory, given the present leadership in Ukraine, the Russians would be called upon to reenter the area in short order, as it is not difficult for even an ordinary intelligence to imagine what the Ukrainian government will be doing to the ethnic Russians remaining in those two Oblasts.
Should the Russians cede any territory, given the present leadership in Ukraine, the Russians would be called upon to reenter the area in short order, as it is not difficult for even an ordinary intelligence to imagine what the Ukrainian government will be doing to the ethnic Russians remaining in those two Oblasts.
Your viewpoint of the remaining scenario is, IMO, really naive. Either you reject completely the character of the leadership in Ukraine over the past eight years, or you somehow believe that a settlement that abandons any of the four Oblasts will bring little girls with bouquets of flowers.
Russia’s prewar demands are looking pretty good right now. Ukraine could be as whole as it was back then. Good luck on that being the case now. But, hey, anything to weaken Russia including allowing your country to be used by the west.
Russian December 2021 proposition was excellent for Europe but not good enough for American MIC.
I supported Putins demand that Ukraine be neutral and the NATO expansion stop. Unfortunately, the Ukrainians wanted to align with the EU and NATO.
Ukraine’s intransigence did not justify a major war. The situation was very much like 1939 when Hitler opposed the alliance between UK and France with Poland that he claimed [correctly] was aimed at encircling Germany. Hitler also claimed he was concerned by Polan’t persecution of the Germans who lived in Poland. But German’s geo-strategic problems and the persecution of 800,000 German Poles did not justify a war that ultimately killed 50 million people.
I understand Putin’s geo-political problems. Butas much as I oppose US/NATO, Putin’s grievances do not justify a war that has already killed over 100,000 people.
Ukraine has the right to self determination even if Putin and I don’t agree with the decisions its government makes.
War is the worst thing human beings do. Nothing justifies war except (i) self-defense against an actual or imminent attack; (ii) to stop an ongoing or imminent holocaust level genocide or (iii) a war of national liberation against a colonial or neo-colonial overlord.
Finally, the second part of Putin’s 2021 demand was to restore NATO forces to their positions in 1997. That was pure revanchism. It was Putin’s attempt to restore Russia to the geo-strategic position occupied by the USSR. That is simply not partof my agenda. I supported Putin when Russia responded to the call for help from Syria and fought ISIS. But rebuilding the Soviet sphere of influence or the Czarist empire is a non-starter for me.
Russia is not the equivalent of China. Putin is trying to restore the power of the Soviet Union with the glory of the Czars through military force. Russia has been involved in continual wars since the breakup of the USSR. By contrast, China has not been involved in a serious war since the 30 day invasion of Vietnam in 1979. China’s Belt and Road project is built on trade and voluntary agreements based on mutual self-advantage, not military force. Putin’s Russia is a sterile dictatorship in the last throes of a dying empire. In many ways China is setting an example that provides the hope for a better future for our species. I don’t know if China will stay through to its peaceful foreign policy in the future. But for the moment, Chinese peacefulness is a stark contrast to Putin’s policy of expansion through war.
The Russian invasion and later annexation of Crimea is one of the most important reasons Ukraine needs/wants NATO membership – as they could not become NATO members while having a border dispute with Russia and as they wanted to improve their economic position (more independence from Russia and less vulnerability to Russian sanctions). they wanted to become an EU member.
While living under a near constant threat of a Russian invasion, there was/is the prospects of attracting the kind of investments needed for a decent economic growth were/are very bad. I would like to hear why you think the Ukrainian stance on NATO/EU membership in anyway represents an unjustified desire for a supposedly independent and sovereign state (unjustified as you put it as “Ukraine’s intransigence“)
Russia justifiably feels threatened by NATO expansion. I understand Ukraine’s insecurity about its proximity to Russia. Before the invasion I believed that the interests of peace would best be served by the implementation of the Minsk agreements, an eventual plebisites in Donetsk and Luhansk with all parties honoring the Budapest accords guaranteeing Ukrainian sovereignty. I was concerned about limiting US/NATO expansion and I hoped that Putin was enlightened enough to irreversible reduction of Russia’s power following the breakup of the USSR and the collapse of the Warsaw Pact.
I believed that both parties needed to compromise for the cause of peace and I was not sympathetic to the anti-Russian Maidan coup. The Maidan coup was based on a legitimate desire for Ukrainian self determination and a resentment of Russian domination. But Maidan was also exploited by the US/CIA into an anti-Russian direction that elevated neo-Nazis and threatened peace.
Once Putin invaded, compromise was off the table and I oppose wars of aggression, which the war in Ukraine is. In the final analysis, I don’t agree with the Ukrainian government’s desire to align with NATO, but Putin’s invasion left them no choice. A classic case of blow back bringing the exact reverse of the goals Putin intended.
Yes and no, yes the leadership does feel restricted by NATO but no they very unlikely actually feel threatened – the chance of a first strike NATO attack on Russia is simply not there while they retain their nuclear armed subs. (the same holds true for NATO). They are also to blame for the increasing number of their neighbors who wants to join NATO – they just caused Sweden and Finland to apply – and Kazakhstan is now also worried that it may be the next Ukraine.
Or to put it a different way, NATO is not as much expanding as it is growing every time new nations feel threatened by Russia – so if Russia felt that NATO getting larger was a very bad thing, they could perhaps behave less aggressive towards their neighbors!?
Well the Budapest accords were at that point already deeply undermined, but I understand the sentiment – the problem as I see it is the substantial amounts of people who have fled the different areas either annexed by Russia or not under Ukrainian government control (and likely also some in the other direction) making a referendum difficult.
I believe that the rightwing turn was and fairly strong anti Russian sentiments following the ousting of the legal government was in no small part made much worse by the Russians taking control of Crimea and by the Russian backing a insurrection in the Donbas – I’m not aware that the US/CIA was much involved in the very early days of this, but you may be privy to information I could have overlooked.
From the time Viktor Yanukovych fled to the Russians took over Crimea less than 7 days passed (23 February to 27 February) – and Igor Girkin (at the time a FSB agent working in Crimea) was approached by people wanting to start an insurrection in the Donbas in March/April.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Annexation_of_Crimea_by_the_Russian_Federation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Igor_Girkin#Involvement_in_the_War_in_Donbas_and_annexation_of_Crimea
I am a bit surprised that you would have a government act against the wished and best interests of their electorate – only following the outbreak of hostilities has the popular support for compromising on joining NATO fallen below a majority – as I argued the need was only partially driven by security concerns likely a significant part of the desire was created by the realization that attracting foreign investments were much more difficult without proper security for the future.
Support for joining NATO 2017:
https://dif.org.ua/en/article/almost-70-of-ukrainians-support-joining-nato-poll
Less than majority support for joining NATO in May 2022:
https://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-nato-poll/31865900.html
Support for joining NATO October 2022:
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/record-83-ukrainians-want-nato-membership-poll-2022-10-03/
For some reason the invasion nullified Russia’s security concerns in your eyes. You said before that Putin “took the bait”. So, you acknowledged there was bait but then you go on to ignore the bait and talk as though Putin turned into Hitler over night. The status quo was no longer acceptable and Russia felt it wasn’t going to change. And they were right. I don’t agree with them invading but I do believe something similar was an inevitability somewhere in the near future.
The invasion did not nullify Russia’s “legitimate” security concerns. But Russia’s “legitimate” security concerns do not justify a major war in which Russia is the aggressor.
Russia’s legitimate security concerns are not to be dismembered by NATO. But Putin has always been a racist Russian chauvinist ruthless dictator who wants to restore Russia as an imperial power with a sphere of influence dominating the countries of Eastern Europe and the former USSR. That is not a legitimate security concern.
Putin’s goal has always been to rebuild Russian imperialism. He originally tried to join NATO and the G7/G8 in an anti-China alliance until he was rebuffed by NATO and kicked out of the G8. Then he flipped to China. But he maintained his goal of restoring Russian imperialism and domination over the former USSR and its sphere of influence. early in his presidency he built the Monument to the White Warriors to commemorate the White Russian leaders who fought to restore the Czar after the Bolshevik Revolution and who were responsible for the “White Terror” in Ukraine. Putin often quotes racist Czarist philosophers and military leaders like Ivan Ilyin and Anton Denikin. Putin has even encouraged Russian Orthodox Patriarch Kirill to venerate Putin calling Putin’s regime a “miracle of God.”
So Putin supports Russia’s legitimate interest not to be dominated by NATO while also trying to re-establish the Soviet and Czarist empire. When Russia come to the aid of Syria against NATO backed rebels, I support Russia When Russia helps the Central African republic fight against jihadists, I support Russia.But when Russia tries to conquer territory from its neighbors, I oppose that.
We are within inches of a Third World War… I believe it was Einstein who said it would our last. He also said it will be fought with sticks and stones…
The Ukraine war proves the US has always been friends with Nazis. They just didn’t expect for Russia to still have a strong hatred for Nazis.