5 ms·
> It cannot be overstated how utterly nonexistent the diplomacy has been between Washington and Moscow particularly since 2014. Because one side sees the other
by spywaregorilla 3y ago
> It cannot be overstated how utterly nonexistent the diplomacy has been between Washington and Moscow particularly since 2014. Because one side sees the other as a fundamentally inferior state.
Perhaps it is because in 2014, Russia broke its promises and stole Crimea with a military invasion and the west figured they could not be trusted and would almost certainly do the same thing again; which they did.
- pphysch 3y agoBefore that, NATO broke its promise to "not expand one-inch eastward" and to not interfere with Ukrainian sovereignty. There are no good guys here. By the way, how many people died in the Russian invasion of Crimea and resulting occupation? Surely it was very bloody (like the current war) because Crimeans didn't want it, right?
- delfinom 3y agoYou are repeating a Russian lie https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/exposing-the-myth-of-western-betrayal-of-russia/ https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/exposing-the-myth-... There was never a promise. >Beset by chaos at home, an increasingly beleaguered Yeltsin turned to historical revisionism. He began to interpret the Two Plus Four Treaty as a ban on NATO expansion east of Germany, on the basis that it only permitted alliance activities on East German territory. He (and later Putin) claimed that the failure to mention Eastern Europe, together with the stipulated restrictions in relation to former GDR terrain, meant an implicit Western rejection of eastward enlargement. Also later > At preliminary bilateral talks in Helsinki in March 1997, Clinton refused to respond to Yeltsin’s call for binding restrictions on the establishment of NATO security infrastructure in new member states.
- Iwan-Zotow 3y ago> There was never a promise. ha ha "Kissinger confirms US verbal promise to Gorbachev not to expand NATO eastward"
- luuurker 3y ago> verbal promise "ha ha" indeed.
- Iwan-Zotow 3y agomake up your mind "There was never a promise"
- _kbh_ 3y ago[dead]
- mrguyorama 3y agoIf you want to talk about promises of not expanding, maybe we should talk about that time Ukraine gave Russia a bunch of Soviet nukes for the assurance they would be left alone to govern themselves. Here's a hint: Only one of these two promises would even be relevant. The promise of not expanding NATO never existed, BUT EVEN IF IT DID then Russia should be invading the US, not Ukraine. There is no justification to invade Ukraine as a defense against NATO, as even if you believe NATO controls Ukraine (it doesn't), taking that land merely increases the size of Russia's border with NATO. But you know all this.
- pphysch 3y agoIt is supremely disingenuous to imply that Washington's Ukraine policy circa 2014 (before Russia stole Crimea) is in any way compatible with the terms and spirit of the Budapest Agreements, and that Russia was therefore the first mover in violating it.
- spywaregorilla 3y agoThe US' decisions in no way grant Russia the moral or legal right to invade Ukraine.
- pphysch 3y ago[flagged]
- spywaregorilla 3y ago[flagged]
- onetimeacc777 3y ago[flagged]