1. Pretty sure you're not my wife, so you can get up off your knees.
2.
Posted on 08/17/2025 9:32:16 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Special envoy Steve Witkoff says the White House extracted critical wins from its Friday summit with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, even as President Donald Trump failed to walk away with the ceasefire he was loudly advocated for.
Security guarantees offering Ukraine “Article 5-like protections” are the real prize, Witkoff told CNN’s Jake Tapper on Sunday. They’re “game-changing,” he said.
“We didn’t think that we were anywhere close to agreeing to Article Five protection from the United States in legislative enshrinement within the Russian Federation, not to go after any other territory when the peace deal is codified,” Witkoff said on CNN’s “State of the Union.”
He continued, saying, “We got to an agreement that the United States and other European nations could effectively offer Article 5-like language to cover a security guarantee.”
Trump spent much of the week ahead of the Alaska meeting issuing threats over what could happen if Russia wasn’t serious about a ceasefire. In the end, Trump’s confab with Putin, in which the U.S. president feted his Russian counterpart with a red carpet and clapped as he approached, didn’t even result in concrete plans for a follow-up meeting.
Still, Witkoff is optimistic.
“We’re on the path for the first time,” he told Tapper. “We are seeing accommodation more than we’ve seen in the past, certainly more than we saw in the last administration. And that’s encouraging. Now we have to build on that.”
The president has warmed to the idea of playing at least some role in maintaining peace and deterring future Russian invasions into Ukraine after the war, telling European leaders in a virtual meeting last week that he was open to contributing security guarantees to Kyiv in a final settlement.
(Excerpt) Read more at politico.com ...
FOR THOSE UNFAMILIAR....
Article 5 of the NATO Treaty is the cornerstone of the alliance’s collective defense principle. Here’s what it means, objectively and precisely:
“An armed attack against one or more of [the NATO members] in Europe or North America shall be considered an attack against them all.”
— North Atlantic Treaty, Article 5
This means that if any NATO member is attacked, the other members are obligated to respond as if they themselves were attacked. The response can include military force, but each country decides what form its assistance will take, in line with its own constitutional processes.
Horrible precedent.
“No security guarantees or additional aid to Ukraine
If Zelensky asks, Trump should offer to send the DNC cavalry”
https://x.com/BasedMikeLee/status/1957254683095154724?t=kqNZ1Z3vRwanph1-E5Mq9g&s=19
Article 5 would only apply if Ukraine was a member of NATO, which is something Russia is not going to allow so there will be no security guarantee through NATO.
Ukraine can only exist as a neutral country. It cannot be a part of NATO or anything else no offensive weapons can be in Ukraine.
If offensive weapons are put in Ukraine then I would expect the Russians to put offensive weapons in Cuba in Mexico and then will all be even.
The article 5 like security is not binding.
When did Ukraine join NATO?
Crappy idea to get hopes up before the real deal is signed.
shut up
Nobody said Article 5 would apply asshole
1. Pretty sure you're not my wife, so you can get up off your knees.
2.
“Article 5” is how World War I and World War II started !
you’re a female?
Notice the “like” part. But still a terrible idea (assuming this isn’t fake news).
Putin is going nowhere so this means nothing. Unless it means from some future date, Article 5 then applies to Ukraine’s remaining territory. That is essentially like saying Ukraine will join NATO. But I think what it really means is (after some poor translation) other east European countries happening to be members of NATO can rely on the protection of Article 5 which has been the case since before Feb 2022 anyway.
Abbey Roadeo
This is insane !
Giving even more “security Guarantees” means a greater likelihood of war.
Canada out of NATO now !
I have a hard time believing Article 5 like security guarantees is good enough. I’m no trade expert, but didn’t Trump sign a Mexican Canada USA trade deal in Trump’s first term? In Trump’s second term, Trump imposed new tariffs on Canada and Mexico. What good is the original Mexican Canada USA trade deal if Trump can change the tariffs?
If Russia can’t defeat a little country like Ukraine, it damn sure wouldn’t last against nato. Especially with all the manpower lossses they already have had.
Don’t worry, zelinski will find a way to screw this all up
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.