THIS MAY HELP CLARIFY RUSSIAN REJECTION OF PEACE TALKS
Minsk I: failed: NO cease-fire
Minsk II: failed:
Brokered by France and Germany, Minsk II again sought to halt the conflict that began when Russia-backed separatists seized swaths of territory following Russia’s 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula.
But years on, there has been no full political settlement and deadly fighting between Ukraine and the rebels continued.
WHAT IS THE ‘MINSK CONUNDRUM?
Ukraine sees the 2015 agreement as an instrument to re-establish control over the rebel territories.
It wants a ceasefire, control of the Russia-Ukraine border, elections in the Donbas, and a limited devolution of power to the separatists – in that order.
Russia views the deal as obliging Ukraine to grant rebel authorities in Donbas comprehensive autonomy and representation in the central government, effectively giving Moscow the power to veto Kyiv’s foreign policy choices.
Only then would Russia return the Russia-Ukraine border to Kyiv’s control.
MINSK III/”Normandy Format” met during talks in Belarus from 2016-2019
May, 2019 & reaffirmed in July 2019, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy made peace talks with Russia his top priority inviting the other nations to a dialogue saying: “Let’s discuss who Crimea belongs to and who isn’t in the Donbas region.” On 18 July 2019, a “comprehensive” cease-fire was agreed with arbitration by the Trilateral Contact Group on Ukraine [muti-subgroups within the Trilateral Contact Group were created: sub-group on political issues, sub-group on economic questions, sub-group on humanitarian situation in the conflict area and sub-group on security issues.
“NORMANDY FORMAT MEETING”-1 in 2016 in Berlin
“NORMANDY FORMAT MEETING”-2 September 2019, stated intention to meet by French President Emmanuel Macron and Russian President Vladimir Putin.
10 October, Zelenskyy repeated again: “Let’s discuss who Crimea belongs to and who isn’t in the Donbas region.”
“NORMANDY FORMAT MEETING”-3
On 16 October, French and German leaders decided to hold another “Normandy Format” meeting.
“NORMANDY FORMAT MEETING”- 4 [Paris]
A Normandy Format meeting on 26 January 2022
“NORMANDY FORMAT MEETING” at the conclusion of the nine-hour-long meeting held on 10 February, no joint declaration was agreed upon but the representatives planned to meet again in March, 2022.**
**This meeting never occurred following the Russian invasion of Ukraine on 24 February 2022.
President Zelenskyy later announced that the Normandy Format was “destroyed” due to Russia’s actions. France and Germany continue to be involved in peace-talks between the two countries, while also providing support to Ukraine while denouncing Russia.
Yep. The main thing Germany and France always seem to overlook is, Minsk 1 snd 2 gave Russia the very same thing that kicked off Euromaidan in the first place so the idea it would’ve been anything other than a fast track to a bigger conflict is idiotic.
Summer 2013: Yanukovych and Azarov convinced their party to squash the EU Free Trade Association agreement. Both got massive Kremlin kickbacks.
December 2023: Yanukovych signed a deal with Putin that effectively handed Putin the ability to call in Ukraine’s debts within 12 months and then put Kremlin economic management into the Kyiv administration. Economic annexation by the back door.
Of course Putin was incensed by Yanokovych being sacked by a majority vote across ALL parties in the Rada after senior figures his own party resigned, triggering a collapse of his administration. The plan had been for Yanukovych, backed by separatists and Kremlin stooges, to engineer a default that’d trigger the Russian takeover.
Minsk 1 did the same thing but with foreign policy. Of course Ukraine didn’t implement it. No sane government would’ve. It was a shit deal cooked up by the EU’s biggest pro Russian surrender monkeys.
This city is so far away from the front lines and isn’t even in a contested Oblast. The nearby city of Khmelnytsky is one that is practically untouched by the war. Ukraine doesn’t even enforce conscription from there to the front. So even if Russia did think there might be a military command structure somewhere in that part of Ukraine, it’s highly unlikely they’d have had the precise location of a valuable military target.
The “human shields” logic cannot reasonably apply to EVERY town or city with any military presence in it AT ALL. If it did then every town and city with an office in it somewhere becomes a legitimate target even if it has no connection to the war at all.
Litmus test. Say America and Mexico go toe to toe and fighting concentrates along the border. If some ally of the beanos drops a fat one on a town in the far north of the USA in a state that’s staying out of the conflict, is that “fair do’s, whaddya expect in wartime?”
Alternatively, if Russia wants to play that game, now its military are saying Kherson is as Russian as St Petersburg, Ukraine attacking Russian forces in Kherson or along the Russian border is fundamentally no different to Ukraine attacking some pissant town in the Urals. And the logic flows in the other direction.
Russkie logic 101. Ukraine invaded Russia the minute the White Flag went up in Kherson. The USA is supporting that invasion. Ergo, the USA faces only legitimate retaliation. Nukes are legitimate. Ergo, if Russia nukes Alabama tomorrow America has got no real argument that they were attacked in a disproportionate way.
If you argue with that, they’ll say “but it’s exactly like what you anti-globohomo Freepers said...”