4 ms·

Russia will not reject this ceasefire. It concedes absolutely nothing which basically forces Russia to say yes to it. Because if they don't, they looks so unrea

Russia will not reject this ceasefire. It concedes absolutely nothing which basically forces Russia to say yes to it. Because if they don't, they looks so unreasonable that actual negotiations will fail. My guestimate of the Russian position: - Ukraine cannot ever be part of NATO. - Seized territory remains Russian - Sanctions should be lifted. Next, it will not allow a "peace force" at the buffer zone. Because Russia will be back after it repairs its economy.

kelipso 2y ago
They will... Russia is at an advantage right now in the war. Ceasefire would allow Ukraine to regroup and will give Ukraine a better position in the peace negotiations. Unless there are other considerations, I don't see why Russia would agree to this.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  Exactly. 30 days gives Ukraine an opportunity to build far more extensive defensive fortifications without artillery raining down. Stock up on more drones and missiles. Arrange for more military assistance from Europe. It would be a dream. What does it give Russia? Not much except for a chance to let Ukraine strengthen its position. Putin doesn't care an iota whether he looks "reasonable" or not.
- iteratethis 2y ago
  The ceasefire is basically the world asking Russia: do you have any interest in any long term peace at all? The answer is probably "not really" but Russia cannot signal that this early on. It's more beneficial to say "yes" to something with zero consequences and then dodge peace during actual negotiations.
  - crazygringo 2y ago
    > do you have any interest in any long term peace at all? Why can't Russia signal it's not interested in long-term peace? It's been signaling it's not interested for the entire war. And nothing has changed. > It's more beneficial to say "yes" to something with zero consequences Why? There's zero benefit to Russia. And major consequences to agreeing, because the pause will give Ukraine a significant military advantage in regrouping, that won't benefit Russia nearly as much. It's not zero consequences -- a temporary cease-fire would be a significant military setback for Russia.
    - iteratethis 2y ago
      You need to separate intent from messaging, it's how the game is played. The US is taking a strong lead in brokering a deal. It got Ukraine and the EU to make large concessions (mineral deal, extra EU defense spending) to signal to the US that they are serious about peace and serious about heavily contributing to it to make it possible. If Russia's public answer to this is: NO, I will not even lift a finger, then they open themselves up to US scrutiny because they admitted they are 100% unwilling. As you rightfully put, they are already unwilling, but saying it is another thing. It's much better to go into a peace negotiation suggesting you're willing, than to block any talks at all. What does US scrutiny look like? I have no idea. It could mean more sanctions, more weapon deliveries. Or it could mean nothing at all. I can't read this administration, it's so random.
      - crazygringo 2y ago
        We'll see. But Ukraine and the EU haven't actually made any concessions at all. There is no mineral deal -- yesterday they merely agreed that they will try to negotiate a mineral deal. And the EU hasn't raised defense spending out of any agreement or concession with or to the US -- they're talking about raising spending because the US seems to be pulling out, because of the absence of a deal. > It's much better to go into a peace negotiation suggesting you're willing, than to block any talks at all. Why? They've made it clear that they're willing provided Ukraine makes a bunch of concessions that Ukraine won't make. This is asking for an unconditional ceasefire, which Russia has been clear for years is off the table. And it would disadvantage them militarily. They have no reason to change their position -- for them, peace talks require preconditions, and Ukraine (rightly) rejects all of them.
        iteratethis 2y ago
        What Russia wants is just that...a want. Their position where they allow for no compromises is a bluff where they bet nobody dares to call their bluff. Which might be a good bet, we'll see.
        2y ago
jfengel 2y ago
Ukraine will not agree to both "never part of NATO" and "no peace force". Maybe one or the other, if pushed hard enough, but both together are a guarantee of Russian aggression. Immediately, in the form of border skirmishes, cyber-warfare, and assassinations. Putin is going to have to think long and hard about what he can spin as a victory, because "undefended Ukraine" is not on the table. Personally, I'd say he'd be better off abandoning the NATO one. Hungary can keep Ukraine out of NATO indefinitely. It would take some spin, but honestly, he could just claim "Ukraine will never join NATO" and that'll be true-enough for his audience.

kelipso 2y ago

They will... Russia is at an advantage right now in the war. Ceasefire would allow Ukraine to regroup and will give Ukraine a better position in the peace negotiations. Unless there are other considerations, I don't see why Russia would agree to this.

crazygringo 2y ago
Exactly. 30 days gives Ukraine an opportunity to build far more extensive defensive fortifications without artillery raining down. Stock up on more drones and missiles. Arrange for more military assistance from Europe. It would be a dream. What does it give Russia? Not much except for a chance to let Ukraine strengthen its position. Putin doesn't care an iota whether he looks "reasonable" or not.
iteratethis 2y ago
The ceasefire is basically the world asking Russia: do you have any interest in any long term peace at all? The answer is probably "not really" but Russia cannot signal that this early on. It's more beneficial to say "yes" to something with zero consequences and then dodge peace during actual negotiations.
- crazygringo 2y ago
  > do you have any interest in any long term peace at all? Why can't Russia signal it's not interested in long-term peace? It's been signaling it's not interested for the entire war. And nothing has changed. > It's more beneficial to say "yes" to something with zero consequences Why? There's zero benefit to Russia. And major consequences to agreeing, because the pause will give Ukraine a significant military advantage in regrouping, that won't benefit Russia nearly as much. It's not zero consequences -- a temporary cease-fire would be a significant military setback for Russia.
  - iteratethis 2y ago
    You need to separate intent from messaging, it's how the game is played. The US is taking a strong lead in brokering a deal. It got Ukraine and the EU to make large concessions (mineral deal, extra EU defense spending) to signal to the US that they are serious about peace and serious about heavily contributing to it to make it possible. If Russia's public answer to this is: NO, I will not even lift a finger, then they open themselves up to US scrutiny because they admitted they are 100% unwilling. As you rightfully put, they are already unwilling, but saying it is another thing. It's much better to go into a peace negotiation suggesting you're willing, than to block any talks at all. What does US scrutiny look like? I have no idea. It could mean more sanctions, more weapon deliveries. Or it could mean nothing at all. I can't read this administration, it's so random.
    - crazygringo 2y ago
      We'll see. But Ukraine and the EU haven't actually made any concessions at all. There is no mineral deal -- yesterday they merely agreed that they will try to negotiate a mineral deal. And the EU hasn't raised defense spending out of any agreement or concession with or to the US -- they're talking about raising spending because the US seems to be pulling out, because of the absence of a deal. > It's much better to go into a peace negotiation suggesting you're willing, than to block any talks at all. Why? They've made it clear that they're willing provided Ukraine makes a bunch of concessions that Ukraine won't make. This is asking for an unconditional ceasefire, which Russia has been clear for years is off the table. And it would disadvantage them militarily. They have no reason to change their position -- for them, peace talks require preconditions, and Ukraine (rightly) rejects all of them.
      - iteratethis 2y ago
        What Russia wants is just that...a want. Their position where they allow for no compromises is a bluff where they bet nobody dares to call their bluff. Which might be a good bet, we'll see.
        2y ago

jfengel 2y ago

Ukraine will not agree to both "never part of NATO" and "no peace force". Maybe one or the other, if pushed hard enough, but both together are a guarantee of Russian aggression. Immediately, in the form of border skirmishes, cyber-warfare, and assassinations. Putin is going to have to think long and hard about what he can spin as a victory, because "undefended Ukraine" is not on the table. Personally, I'd say he'd be better off abandoning the NATO one. Hungary can keep Ukraine out of NATO indefinitely. It would take some spin, but honestly, he could just claim "Ukraine will never join NATO" and that'll be true-enough for his audience.