Former US State Department official Victoria Nuland has acknowledged that the US discouraged Ukraine from signing a peace deal with Russia during the early days of the Russian invasion.
Nuland, who recently resigned from her post as Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs, made the comments in an interview that was published on YouTube on September 3.
Mikhail Zygar, an exiled Russian journalist, asked Nuland about former Israeli Prime Minister Naftali Bennet’s claim that the US and its allies blocked his efforts at mediation and reports of former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson urging Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky not to sign a deal.
Zygar also mentioned that David Arakhamia, a Ukrainian official who led negotiations with Russia at a meeting in Istanbul in March 2022, acknowledged last year that a deal was on the table at the time and that Russia’s main demand was for Ukrainian neutrality.
Nuland claimed the US took a hands-off approach to the negotiations when they first started and said it wasn’t until “relatively late in the game” that the Ukrainians started seeking the advice of the US and its allies.
“The Ukrainians began asking for advice on where this thing was going, and it became clear to us, clear to us and the Brits, clear to others, that Putin’s main condition was buried in an annex to this document that they were working on. And it included limits on the precise kinds of weapons systems that Ukraine could have after the deal,” Nuland said.
She said the deal would make Ukraine “neutered” as a military force and said there were no similar constraints on the Russian military. “People inside Ukraine and people outside Ukraine started asking questions about whether this was a good deal, and it was at that point that it fell apart,” Nuland said.
Boris Johnson traveled to Ukraine on April 9, 2022, and, according to Ukrainska Pravda, told Zelensky that even if Ukraine was ready to sign a deal with Russia, the “collective West” was not. Arakhamia confirmed this account in November 2023, saying that when the negotiators returned from Istanbul, Johnson visited Ukraine and “said that we would not sign anything with them at all, and let’s just fight.”
On April 20, 2022, around the time the talks broke down, then-Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu said Turkey thought a deal could be reached following the Istanbul talks, but then it got the impression that some NATO members wanted to prolong the war to weaken Russia.
“After the talks in Istanbul, we did not think that the war would take this long … But, following the NATO foreign ministers’ meeting, it was the impression that… there are those within the NATO member states that want the war to continue, let the war continue and Russia gets weaker. They don’t care much about the situation in Ukraine,” Cavusoglu said.
On April 25, 2022, after visiting Kyiv, Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin declared that one of the US’s goals in the war was to see a “weakened” Russia.
This is like how a killer admits to causing a death, but claims it was accidental, rather than the obvious premeditated murder one.
Too late to ask the dead and the diaspora about her kibosh.
Anyone wonder why a “sovereign” nation couldn’t decide on its own?
It's "sovereignty was illuminated by the 2014 Maidan coup, … "Yatz is our guy." Mme. "F_ck the EU!" Nuland. She's doubtless lying about her inattention ("late in the game" ). And the castrating female, "neuter" Ukraine, comment clearly hit home with little Volody, who never appears but in olive drab.
Yeah, well anyone who is so completely divorced from reality as to consider the possibility for the US to allow the Ukrainians to make any sort of peace deal under any conditions short of Russia unconditionally surrendering and installing a regime of infinitely pliable US puppets in Moscow can be made to believe anything at all. To people that gullible every day life would quickly become lethal.
Such possibility is possible if current oligarchy U.S. regime could be changed for a democratic one.
It's "sovereignty was illuminated by the 2014 Maidan coup, … "Yatz is our guy." Mme. "F_ck the EU!" Nuland. She's doubtless lying about her inattention ("late in the game" ). And the castrating female, "neuter" Ukraine, comment clearly hit home with little Volody, who never appears but in olive drab.
Yep.
The EU needed to f*ck her back by not letting her fat *ss into Europe. Ever.
ditto her hubby.
This has been well documented. Zelensky was told the kill the deal after he okayed it by phone with his team in Istanbul. Boris later arrived to cheer him up. For some reason, our media ignores that Zelensky had already signed a peace deal with Putin in Paris in 2019 that he never implemented.
The New York Times published the documents of a Russia vs. Ukraine peace plan on 15 June 2024.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/06/15/world/europe/ukraine-russia-ceasefire-deal.html
https://news.antiwar.com/2024/06/16/documents-putin-was-willing-to-compromise-to-end-war-in-2022/
https://ua.usembassy.gov/u-s-ukraine-charter-on-strategic-partnership/
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minsk_agreements
http://www.diva-portal.org/smash/get/diva2:1866692/FULLTEXT01.pdf Unpacking the Implementation Challenges of the Minsk II Agreement
https://euromaidanpress.com/minsk-agreements-faq/
https://cis-legislation.com/document.fwx?rgn=3917 Agreement on creation of the Commonwealth of Independent States – the Republic of Belarus, the Russian Federation (RSFSR), Ukraine
Hang all those war deaths, all that pain and suffering and fear, on her soul ("Toria" Nuland). She deserves it.
Of course you have to be aware when Nuland (or any neocon) all of the sudden decides to begin speaking truthfully about anything. The Ukrainians were asking for "advice". Yeah sure. But no, not really. They were asking for permission. Minor point. Ukraine is after all a sovereign country. Well, in the narrative kindly provided to us by the same neocons who for all intents and purposes own the entire Western media. But they are sadly just too dumb for their own good and so they couldn't be expected to read the deals they would sign is what were asked to believe now. Because truthteller Victoria Nuland said it.
There was no "advice". Ukraine was TOLD to keep fighting rather than have peace. Z has probably been told to hold to the U.S. of Atrocities line, or, wind up in an armored carrier, to exit in a pine box.
I think I might lack the imaginative power to ponder the existence of a person of near or above average intelligence who would in all honesty doubt that.
Victoria Nuland could reprise the role of Jabba the Hutt if a Star Wars Movie is ever remade.
Not nice dude. What has Jabba ever done to you?
I agree with Critical. For a villain, you want a most disgusting and evil character. She is highly accomplished in both, but Killary might be a tough competitor any day.
Dude, I thought he was insulting Jabba, not Nuland.
I like Jabba too. He is easier on the eyes. But, he is not as evil.
The Star Wars cast approves of Nuland, Harris & Biden.
The New Lords of The Sith! In theaters near you, starting November 5th.
I dunno – casting a cis Caucasian male like Biden ? Not something Disney Star Wars does any more.
"We came, we saw, he died, cackle, cackle" Killary.
Jabba Nuland, in Huttese : "Yatz is my kind of scum – weak and pliable."
Jabba was better looking.
Right, let the war continue, and let Russia get weaker. How's that working out for you, Z?
I think pretty well, in bank.
If he can survive to spend it.
"Former US State Department official Victoria Nuland has acknowledged that the US discouraged Ukraine from signing a peace deal with Russia during the early days of the Russian invasion."
The US ordered, the Ukraine followed the orders.
Please spare me. My teeth clench and I get chills, exactly like when I feel Satan's presence. Did they ask her about the Fu@king Nord Stream II?
Which is why we should disqualify her from ever being spoken of in public as a "former diplomat." Diplomats prevent wars, by engaging in diplomacy… warmongers kick-start them.
Which is why we should disqualify her from ever being spoken of in public as a "former diplomat." Diplomats prevent wars, by engaging in diplomacy… warmongers kick-start them.
She was never a diplomat (except in name). She was a sycophant.
Hmmm, as war is just diplomacy with guns I fail to see the disconnect.
Theoretically, all foreign affairs are to maximize the interests of the home country, whether war, trade, or other. Under crony capitalism though of course, these things are being conducted in the interest of the connected few.
Foreign affairs are always conducted to maximize the interests of the ruling classes of the regimes conducting them.
The “countries” are just the palatial estates of those ruling classes, and the “citizens” the serfs who take care of the cleaning, gardening, etc. for their masters.
Some regimes are better than others at prettifying that reality up, but the next regime isn’t like that, yet survives for very long, will be the first.
That's the libertarian perspective … true almost all the time. There have been times and forms of govt, like small scale socialism or the direct democracy of Canton style Switzerland when this seems less the case? But I agree almost entirely. And that is why "war is the health of the state" if by state we mean those who own it.
Precisely
The donor class, a part of the apparatus that governs is all. It can be referred to as the "deep state". It has a hierarchy that cannot be touched, unless one wants to tempt political suicide. It holds for democrats and republicans, even independents. It is why when promises of change are made, there is no change. "We the People" then languish.
Victoria Nuland and her husband Robert Kagan along with his brother Fredrick Kagan and wife Kimerly Kagan all need to go to the gas chamber.
Robert Kagan is the head NEOCON thinker and Kimberly Kagan founded and runs the Institute for the Study of War – ISW which is so often quoted in the American press.
All are NEOCON warmongers leading America to doom!
They each are responsible for millions of deaths worldwide directing America to kill and kill!
They are the sort of people that run gas chambers. Or run the people who run the gas chambers. I shall hope to be forever spared the hate required to wish upon any person to sink to their level.
And you need to go the pharmacy and refill your thorazine prescription.
A puppet regime can't be neutral. It is always on the side of those who own it.
The other point: the natural resources of Donbass worth of several trillions, and which, highly likely, are already secretly sold to American corporations by Kiev regime. According to the peace deal, Donbass was supposed to have a very high degree of autonomy. It would create problems for "the new owners". So, the plan was to accomplish the ethnic cleansing which Kiev regime started in February 2022.
Yes…Yes, here is the body, the weapon, the fingerprints and my confession, I’m busy, leave or I shall be forced to call the pleece.
She is the living personification of evil. She and her husband, the axis of evil.
even though I will serve in the AFU in less than a year, I do want peace. We will probably never fully get back our land. As melencholic as it is, we might need to give up parts of Crimea and the Donbass
Screw the Russkie
I doubt that you will get all territories back through feats on the battlefield, but I'm more optimistic that Russia at some point will want to give it back against having sanctions softened.
They were already in 2021 (late if I remember correctly) losing military contracts (for advanced things like planes) because of the sanctions from 2014.
Those were light sanctions compared with what is now in place – their economy is going to experience very bad times over the next years – basically moving into third world territory – whereby I mean that what they can sell is primary sector products – so not much value added.
@Christian Vila Please don't serve in the AFU! The State of Ukraine is not worth it!
Partitioning Ukraine is the proper solution i. m. o. On this website that has been defended by the author David Stockman.
No
we will not be partitioned after but 30 years of life
Well, East and South Ukrainians have made their choice already. To say nothing of Crimeans.
east ukrainians I can quarter get (sadly)
South Ukrainians ARE UKRAINIANS NOT RUSSIANS. THEY WRE FORCEFULLY ANNEXED BY THE PIGS RESPUBLIK
south crimeas were also forcefully annexed but I guess are kinda russian
Ukrainian history is complex, there was Katherine the Great a German princess who helped to get German farmers to come to Ukraine, there are Polish and Hungarian and most of all Russian people.
The troubles really originated in 2008 when Bush meddled to include Ukraine in NATO, which the Europeans and Russians opposed. Stalin and Hitler had an agreement to let the Ukrainian Germans return to Germany.
BUT ITS STILL OUR SOVEREIGN LAND
No. It isn't your land.
You don't live in these regions. Those who live in Crimea and the Donbass own this land. Not you, who lives in Lemberg/Lwow/Lvov/Lviv.
The true owners of these lands made a decision to shrug off the rule of Kiev. That is their right. To say otherwise is to claim they are slaves of those who live in Lemberg/Lwow/Lvov/Lviv. Which would be you.
But seriously, when you pass your last exam – disappear. Don't join the Ukrainian army. If you can, leave Ukraine and don't look back. If you join the Ukrainian Army you will only join it in time die with the rest of this army.
There is no future for Ukraine.
Yes, it is our land. Our Ukrainian land. And I have never heard of “Lemberg” or “Lwow” or “Lvov.” I have only heard of Lviv. The people of Crimea and Donbass did not choose to leave Kyiv. The Russians held there hand and chose it for them. When I pass my last exam, I WILL join the army. I will not die, and when I do, so be it. God will save us. There is a future for Ukraine, and I want to be part of it.
Time will tell, there is time to grow up and change until your final exams. You do not want to become cannon fodder, your parents do not want that, they love you, that is why you are here and not in Ukraine and they could migrate to the US.
The megalomaniacs in Washington and Kiev destroyed Ukraine. They did not care about Ukraine, only about their own bank accounts.
A common trope; the west is destroying us
Christian you know, smart little dogs know to not provoke the big big dog next door. That is common sense. It is also common sense to stop fighting a fight you can’t win. It was stupid of the little dog to count on real support if needed. The big dog who encouraged the little one will not risk a fight he will just go home.
Do some research. You will find this to be true. The US leadership elite is ready to turn the whole of Europe into ashes to hold on to the universal hegemony they own. NATO ‘s purpose was always to be the combat zone to fight for American interests and turn Europe into ashes, and no combat on the American continent. Dig in to history, look it up, Ukraine is a proxy for US interests, it makes sense to American megalomaniacs. The Ukrainian people lost a big opportunity to be neutral serving Ukrainian interests and prosper. But the US owned Ukraine after the regime change. BIDEN SAID NO WAY. Recall, Putin tried to negotiate with Biden in Dec. 2021, not with Zelensky, with BIDEN, that should make all your bells ring loud and clear. Biden was in charge, NOT Zelensky. Zelensky is not in charge now either, his term ended he is de facto president and gets paid and will do as told.
If you love your country you would want peace for Ukraine and the people above all else.
I do want peace
I don’t want to die.
But I don’t want to surrender a lot of land to the Russians
Christian for Ukraine now it is all or nothing. Face it, Ukraine is left standing and dying alone, a negotiated end may still be possible, the alternative is UNCONDITONAL SURRENDER. I would hope the Russians will be decent and humane victors who do know what the irrational, humiliating Versailles Unconditional Surrender did to Germany. It aimed at total destruction of the Bismarck Germany. When Anglo-Saxon’s elite can’t compete they destroy, that is the motivation why they hate Russia and China and the EU. NATO was used as a tool to control the EU. Get back to the Minsk agreements if you can, they were fair treaties with autonomy for the Russian speaking Ukrainians. First, tell the Americans to go to hell first and to take their weapons with them.
How about Poland, they want Galicia back. In the end the vultures will pick the bones of Ukraine, as they did when they picked the bones of Russia under Yeltsin, Clinton’s boy.
poland doesnt want galicia back.
Theres no poles here
Of course theres SOME but like barely any
What is now called Lviv has had other names, which I listed for you. If you didn’t know that then I suggest that what you have been taught about your history is seriously lacking. But I’m not surprised. There is a lot about today’s Ukraine that is based on fantasy and lies.
You are young, ignorant and naive. Reality will disabuse you of a lot of your illusions if it does not kill you first.
Me not knowing the other names was sarcasm
Lemberg is in Hunnic
Lwow is in Polack
Lvov is in Russkie
And Lviv is my language
And you are naïve to act like you know our history
It would help the world if Americans picked up books.
Well, East and South Ukrainians have made their choice already. To say nothing of Crimeans.
The Ukraine is already partitioned the Poles have their own interests too. You must live with the possibilities as they are. The US does not care about Ukraine, they will walk away as they always do.
Also there is a distinction between nationalism which is narcissism, and real Patriotism which is loving your country.
The politicians who sold the country and the people to the American hegemon are no patriots, they have their coffers packed and their wealth in foreign banks, they will be in their villas on the French Riviera before the collapse and the people know what happened to them.
I hope, and trust for the sake of Ukrainian people the Russians will be humane in victory and will deal with the perpetrators who did this to the Ukrainian and Russian people.
Victoria Nuland has also acknowledged that the US government has spent $5 billion to overthrow the elected government of Ukraine in February 2014.
https://www.unian.info/politics/910206-since-1991-us-has-invested-5-billion-to-promote-democracy-in-ukraine-but-they-did-not-finance-maidan-nuland.html
The American Peoples should overthrow the Republicans & Democrats.
From your own link:
since 1991 us has invested 5 billion to promote democracy in Ukraine but they did not finance maidan.
So money spent years ahead of any Yanukovych government was even a thing and a specific no to funding the movement that ended up toppling the Yanukovych government.
But do not let facts disturb your version of events.
Polly want a cracker?
Ah, and I was just waiting for a Ukraine Apologist to leap in & try to contradict facts.
And in your case, you chose to misrepresent old information instead of addressing the new information. I guess because it kills the false "Ukraine tried to negotiate but Russia wouldn't !!!" trope.
The new information does not contradict any of the stuff I posted – I have previously stated fairly clearly that the peace attempts in early 2022 foundered on the inability of the parties to come to mutually agreeable terms – I have never claimed that ‘Russia wouldn’t negotiate – where you got that idea from is only clear to you.
Why do you run around in mental circles? Are you a lawyer? In law school, the students that were best at talking in circles over a case, during recitation when the instructor called on them, were deemed to be THE ONE. Never a direct point, just run in mental circles while orating. It was worse in contract law.
What circles are you talking about?
Pretty odd point to try to make when I have just made a very direct point:
And for the record I'm not a lawyer.
The only reason that we didn't negotiate with the Rus is because their "negotiations" would involve a legalized land grab until the next invasion
Minsk II was cover to delay until Ukraine had a military ready to invade Russian Federation territory (Crimea).
Would seem neither side trusts the other.
yup
Under what international law or any accepted principle can the US government meddles in the domestic affairs of another country for any purpose and spends 5,000 millions of dollars against the wishes of the elected government over there? To promote “democracy“ or to undermine the national government?
The answer is that the US could not and did not – what the US did was to support democratic institutions and that was with the approval of the elected governments.
Remember that the majority of the support was delivered prior to the 2010-2014 period of Yanukovych – and Yanukovych did not ask for the assistance to stop!
Clearly this was not seen as such by Yanukovych – he did not ask for the money to stop – he could have – ask yourself why he did not!
@Michael64 "Yanukovych did not ask for the assistance to stop!"
US regime meddling in Ukraine would not have been stopped by 'asking for it to stop'. The US regime ignores that.
So he would not even bother to make it harder/illegal for the US to do so???
We are doing the same thing in Hungary with Samantha Power and USAID. We are stirring up trouble for Victor Orban because he refuses to be our puppet.
Bi- and multilateral treaties (e.g. OECD, USAID, UKAID), the World Bank, IMF, the UNDP etc. regulate official development assistance (ODA) under public international law.
https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/declaration-right-development
https://www.ohchr.org/sites/default/files/Documents/Issues/Development/RTD_booklet_en.pdf
https://legal.un.org/avl/pdf/ha/drd/drd_e.pdf DECLARATION ON THE RIGHT TO DEVELOPMENT
https://www.un.org/en/events/righttodevelopment/
https://www.iom.int/sites/g/files/tmzbdl486/files/jahia/webdav/shared/shared/mainsite/policy_and_research/un/58/A_RES_58_172_en.pdf Resolution 58/172. The right to development
https://www.undp.org
https://www.worldbank.org/en/home
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_Bank
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_Development_Programme
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_development
https://www.oecd.org/en/topics/oda-trends-and-statistics.html
https://www.imf.org/en/Home
https://www.imf.org/en/Data
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Monetary_Fund
https://www.usaid.gov
https://www.ukaiddirect.org
https://www.eolss.net/sample-chapters/C13/E6-67-02-01.pdf INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT LAW AND PUBLIC INTERNATIONAL LAW
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/1468-4446.12752 Foreign aid and the rule of law: Institutional diffusion versus legal reach
https://commission.europa.eu/aid-development-cooperation-fundamental-rights_en
https://www.leidenlawblog.nl/articles/towards-a-needs-oriented-international-development-aid-system
https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/bueros/genf/05659.pdf Implementing the Right to Development
https://library.fes.de/pdf-files/iez/global/50288.pdf The Right to Development – where do we stand?
https://www.cetim.ch/qa-on-the-declaration-on-the-right-to-development/
https://environment-rights.org
https://www.greenclimate.fund
https://www.greenpolicyplatform.org
https://www.globalresiliencepartnership.org
https://www.jus.uio.no/english/services/library/treaties/13/
https://www.jus.uio.no/english/services/library/treaties/02/2-01/declaration-development.html
https://www.yjil.yale.edu/the-right-to-development/
https://hummedia.manchester.ac.uk/schools/soss/politics/political-perspectives/Volume%201%20Issue%201/CIP-2007-01-10.pdf The Declaration on the Right to Development and Implementation
https://www.devex.com
https://www.semafor.com/vertical/politics
@Michael64 "since 1991 us has invested 5 billion to promote democracy in Ukraine"
No, the US regime does not promote democracy. Firstly, the US itself is not a democracy. It is a plutocracy, capitalism is the ideology, strategic action dominates politics, the two-party system excludes candidates, the same clique has ruled for 70 years, presidents are interchangeable, the ‘democratic’ process brings a war criminal mass murderous regime to power, and state propaganda media manufacture consent of citizens who don't have good information. With a little political philosophy (Rawls, Habermas) one can make a decisive critique of ‘US democracy’.
Presenting reality as democracy is ideological deception, serving to manipulate people.
On the US plutocracy, see M. Gilens and B. I. Page – Testing theories of American politics: elites, interest groups, and average citizens (Perspectives on politics september 2014)
War is a racket…
Beautiful ideals were painted for our boys who were sent out to die. The was the "war to end wars." This was the "war to make the world safe for democracy." No one told them that dollars and cents were the real reason. No one mentioned to them, as they marched away, that their going and their dying would mean huge war profits….
I spent 33 years and four months in active military service and during that period I spent most of my time as a high class muscle man for Big Business, for Wall Street and the bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism. I helped make Mexico and especially Tampico safe for American oil interests in 1914. I helped make Haiti and Cuba a decent place for the National City Bank boys to collect revenues in. I helped in the raping of half a dozen Central American republics for the benefit of Wall Street. I helped purify Nicaragua for the International Banking House of Brown Brothers in 1902-1912. I brought light to the Dominican Republic for the American sugar interests in 1916. I helped make Honduras right for the American fruit companies in 1903. In China in 1927 I helped see to it that Standard Oil went on its way unmolested. Looking back on it, I might have given Al Capone a few hints. The best he could do was to operate his racket in three districts. I operated on three continents.~Smedley Butler
Ukraine had it in its power to stop any US support – even Yanukovych himself did not do this – perhaps you are afraid of your own shadow?
For what it is worth we agree that the US two party system (like First past the post in UK) is a very bad way to do democracy.
@Michael64 "Ukraine had it in its power to stop any US support"
The ukrainian nationalists would not have wanted it to stop.
Yanukovych did not have trouble trying other things the Ukrainian nationalists did not like as clearly evident from history.
You fail to make proper arguments – thanking no to the aid would have been easier that signing a deal with the Russians.
For the simple reason that the one required one act to be a fait-accompli – the other required a long time to implement.
@Michael64 "Yanukovych … implement"
1. The US regime was meddling in Ukraine’s internal affairs. It co-orchestrated the violent coup of january-february 2014. It did that to use Ukraine as a bulwark of aggression against Russia.
2. Russia proposed a better economic deal than the EU. So the legitimate ukrainian government chose that deal.
Only you have no proof that the US co-orchestrated the violent coup of january-february 2014. Until you do…
"proof that the US co-orchestrated the violent coup of january-february 2014."
Go make your homework for that.
I have there is no proof! But you prove me wrong, because me claiming that there is no red swans can be proven false by just finding one red one – proving that there are none – can only ever be a claim.
@Michael64 "since 1991 us has invested 5 billion to promote democracy in Ukraine"
Secondly, more than seven out of ten autocratic regimes in the world get military support from the US regime. On that, see
Matthew Hoh – Nearly 3/4 of the world’s dictators receive US weapons and military assistance
(Counterpunch 22 november 2022)
I'm sorry does the fact that the US supports autocratic regimes prove what happened in Ukraine?
Moreover if it was so easy to 'sponsor' a coup in Ukraine – why did Putin not do that?
@Michael64 "does the fact that the US supports autocratic regimes prove what happened in Ukraine?"
It is evidence that the US regime does not promote democracy.
"if it was so easy to 'sponsor' a coup in Ukraine – why did Putin not do that?"
Russia aimed to have Minsk 2 carried out.
Not how proof's work – it is however proof that the US does not exclusively promote democracy.
With weapons – so why not go for the much cheaper coup option?
Even had the SMO worked in 3 days it would have costed a lot more through sanctions – than the coup would have cost.
@Michael64 "Not how proof's work"
It is how empirical evidence works.
"With weapons"
No, with negotiations.
No evidence that the US supports autocracies in some countries is not evidence that the US does not in general support democracy where they see it as possible.
There are about 83 autocracies in the world today, the US does not support the following:
1) Afghanistan,
2) China,
3) Cuba,
4) Iran,
5) Myanmar,
6) North Korea,
6) Myanmar,
7) Somalia,
8) Syria,
9) Turkmenistan,
10) Uzbekistan,
11) Vietnam,
12) Yemen
13) Myanmar
14) Somalia
15) Chad,
16) Eritrea,
17) Laos,
18) Hong Kong,
https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/autocratic-countries
Not actually listed as autocracies but arguably so:
19) Belarus
20) Russia
By your metric, you should be able to find 7 autocracies for each 3 autocracies on my list, if we stick to the 18 recognized autocracies on my list your list should contain 42 autocracies that you can show the US supports. Or you should be able to show that autocracies on my list are actually supported by the US.
Negotiations – it was Putin who ended negotiations and initiated the SMO.
@Michael64 "autocracies"
On autocracies that get military support from the US regime, see
Matthew Hoh – Nearly 3/4 of the world’s dictators receive US weapons and military assistance
(Counterpunch 22 november 2022)
See the method that the author applies to calculate it.
Several problems with the list:
1) it is outdated Afghanistan and Yemen (still not free) no longer gets US assistance
To add to this the list includes countries which technically may receive some US assistance, but clearly are not fielding US style forces or rely upon US support for maintaining their not free status like:
2) Kazakhstan Y
3) Kyrgyzstan Y
4) Tajikistan Y
5) Turkmenistan Y
6) Uzbekistan Y
7) Vietnam Y
Also we were talking about autocracies – the list is somewhat different.
If you go to the map on:
https://securityassistance.org/map/
Which is what they base the list upon you can see that this is more akin to a list of countries which the US is not in conflict with – and the list will be much shorter if you apply some filter for minimum level of support/assistance.
Either way – this is clear evidence that the US does engage with autocracies and do not exclude such states from any kind of assistance. That however is not evidence that the US does not support democracy – you can engage with autocracies while promoting democracy.
One case of a place where the US does not even try to promote democracy is Saudi Arabia.
"it was Putin who ended negotiations and initiated the SMO."
No, by 22 february 2022 there were no negotiations going on.
Blinken at a press availability on 26 january 2022: “First of all, there is no change; there will be no change”.
That was an ending of negotiations.
There were no negotiations going on by February 21 2022, but there also was no war so negotiations could be continued at any time.
Blinken saying “First of all, there is no change; there will be no change” – is just making a negotiation position – that may have been what made Putin break off negotiation and start the war, but it is not ending negotiations, by definition.
“There were no negotiations going on by February 21 2022,”
Good that you admit it.
“negotiations could be continued at any time.”
1. No, because the deadline was passed.
2. ‘Negotiating’ with the US regime makes no sense because it is fake and the US regime only listens to violence.
Well it takes two to negotiate so if you say that Putin was no longer negotiating then there were no onging negotiations.
1) who set that deadline? God? Otherwise it was open for postponement – the party that decided the deadline cannot be postponed is the party that ends negotiations by proceeding to violence/war/SMO.
2) If you are of that opinion then you are in effect breaking off the the negotiations and proceeding to war.
This is just how the process of negotiations is defined.
"evidence that the US supports autocracies in some countries is not evidence that the US does not in general support democracy where they see it as possible."
Now you build in an extra clause: "where they see it as possible". So you change the argument, and you turn it into a subjective opinion of the US regime.
Nobody needs to accept that.
Objective evidence shows the US regime often does not support democracy and often attacks it. Its basic goal is not to support democracy.
Make your homework on that.
To claim that the US supports democracy I do not have to prove that they do it to the exclusion of everything else nor that they do it in every country on earth – so saying where possible is just showing the reasoning that I believe they apply.
In other words – this is not moving the goal posts – the claim that the US supports democracy is still valid – both the US and the Soviets failed to force a more modern kind of governance upon the Afghans – wasting resources trying to promote democracy where there is no basis for it is not actually promoting democracy but polishing your own halo.
That said we agree that the US does not always support democracy I can think primarily of some countries in the middle East (and historically the America’s south of Mexico – though that no longer seems to be the outright policy).
“we agree that the US does not always support democracy”
Exactly. For example, in Ukraine it did not. In january-february 2014 it helped overthrow the democratically elected government and install a pro-US-regime vassal government – which is what happened.
The US regime goal was not 'democracy – it doesn't know what that is, even calling itself 'democratic' -, the goal was aggression against Russia.
In Ukraine the US supported democracy between 1991 and 2014 at least – the last 3 years with the approval of the Yanukovych administration – the idea that the US was undermining democracy is patently absurd as Yanukovych could by decree made their support illegal – he did not because he was not worried.
There has been two elections after Yanukovych was ousted – in the second Zelenskyy a more pro Russian president than Petro Poroshenko was elected and the far right lost their last MP – disproving the notion that this was an antidemocratic coup – in no other coup in any part of the world have the changeover in administration been anything like it has in Ukraine.
Yes … so over many years, we paid for the gangs to develop, get organized, get weapons, get propaganda and influence. We paid for politicians beholden to us and enemy to Russia. We made sure everyone knew for the good times to continue, Yanukovich needed to go.
But, yes, Maidan was the Ukies own deal …
No for so many years the US supported democracy in Ukraine.
And naturally that is an offense to the Russians as they the enemies of strong democracies on their borders.
No that was the EU doing so.
He made a deal with Russia, a better deal, which would have benefited Ukraine. So, he had to go. The issue forced by the oh so business oriented, capitalist U.S. of Amnesia.
Not <really for me to say – that is up to the Ukrainians to decide.
Why would the US feel upset by the EU losing a trade deal?
@Michael64 "Why would the US feel upset by the EU losing a trade deal?"
Because the US regime wants to cut off Russia from Europe, including economically. The vassal EU goes along with that.
No indication that EU is merely a US vassal – we are in continued trade dispute just to mention one thing, EU dropped the deal it was on track to get with Ukraine on account of a referendum in the Netherlands.
"No indication that EU is merely a US vassal"
I did not write 'merely'.
"on account of a referendum in the Netherlands."
No, the Netherland's government overrode the outcome of that referendum.
"US supported democracy" … ha ha ha ha ha ha ha … omg, no one and this includes the foolish satraps of western Europe, believes this nonsense any more. It's more a question of being on the side of the hegemon or agin' it.
If you can actually make an argument supported by evidence then I might bother to answer, assertions without evidence should just be ignored.
That's Your specialty, Mikey … such as "US supported democracy" and other claptrap "arguments" … ha ha ha ha ha
Yes indeed it is my specialty to make arguments that I backup with evidence when needed – assertions seems to be your specialty.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2022/what-george-soros-said-about-ukraine-in-a-2014-cnn-interview/
And:
George Soros: I may invest $1 billion in Ukraine
https://money.cnn.com/2015/03/30/investing/ukraine-soros-billion-russia/index.html
@Michael64 "they did not finance maidan."
How do we know? On 25 february 2022, the day after the start of the military operation of the Russian armed forces against the Ukrainian armed forces, NED quickly removed its accounting of its operations in Ukraine from its website. Evidently NED is hiding something.
You can see the screenprints, the first made at 14:53 pm and the second at 23:10 pm, in
Jeremy Kuzmarov – National Endowment for Democracy deletes records of funding projects in Ukraine
If you have proof then provide it – the idea that the NED would have documented on its website that it was engaged in nefarious acts is patently absurd.
@Michael64 "the idea that the NED would have documented on its website that it was engaged in nefarious acts is patently absurd."
1. NED did quickly remove its accounts, so evidently it wanted to hide them.
2. The idea that NED is not engaged in nefarious acts is absurd.
You really think these nefarious acts would be documented on their own website??? You do know that you can access their information even after they have taken it down!?
Things published on the web are backed up many places – the notion that any organization would document their own crimes is patently absurd – as is the idea that they would think they could hide what they had published by taking down their website.
how stupid do you have to be to misread your own quote
lol
The headline is not compatible with what was said in the interview.
The only thing she admits was the following:
“The Ukrainians began asking for advice on where this thing was going, and it became clear to us, clear to us and the Brits, clear to others, that Putin’s main condition was buried in an annex to this document that they were working on. And it included limits on the precise kinds of weapons systems that Ukraine could have after the deal,” Nuland said.
This is like in my video, one of the dumbest argument of the War in Ukraine.
https://youtu.be/wjU-ve4Pn4k?si=iMP97fNDxKUSH6GA
Drip, drip, drip. The truth slowly finds its way out, as the effort to maintain lies becomes tiresome.
Kudos to Mikhail Zygar for his ability to draw a semi-straight answer from doggedly crooked Victoria Nuland. That requires both skill and persistence, which most interviewers lack.
Nuland's comments also anchor the interpretation that she was forced out from the State Dept., since she no longer displays a forceful conviction (or conceit) that Ukraine must defeat Russia. She's basically indicating readiness to negotiate, though framing it in the past tense. If she were still on board with the old gang, she'd keep up by echoing their phony optimism.
The truth sometimes is released as what’s called a limited hangout … just the “truths” they want to release for just a certain purpose.
Yes, that too.
America sees the rest in its image and measures everything against its low scum worthy standards.Thats why it allows negotiation hoping others woukd behave the way it does. It gets angry confused and disoriented when sanity prevails and people behave like equal and like adult .It doesnt like peace . War is its breakfast lunch dinner and the war is chosen as main course at the funeral.
Didnot Hillary lead US in denouncing the negotiated deal about Iranian nuclear programme brokered by Turkey in Brazil after fully endorsing the template of the deal ?
Didnt Bolton brag about how US renege
d on paying North Korea as agreed for returning the hostage?