The true shock in this war came from Ukraine itself - its people, defying scripts written in Moscow and Washington
Yet, the old ways of thinking persist. Speaking in Berlin this week, I was struck by how much of the debate revolved around Trump imposing a top-down solution 1/ x.com
Yet, the old ways of thinking persist. Speaking in Berlin this week, I was struck by how much of the debate revolved around Trump imposing a top-down solution 1/ x.com
So what is shocking for me in many discussions about Ukraine, especially now after the Trump election, is how experts and policy makers focus on Russian perspectives, American perspectives, German perspectives, ignoring Ukrainian perspectives 2/
The most surprising and decisive factor in this war has actually been Ukraine: it didn’t fall in three days, drove Russians out of Kharkiv and Sumy, confined the Black Sea fleet, restored the grain corridor, struck Kursk, and learned to hit deep into Russia 3/
So Ukraine surprised everyone, including Russia, NATO, and the US. And yet the entire discussion about the future of peace is still within the same old lens, sort of what is happening in Moscow, what Putin will think about it, will Trump be anti-NATO 4/
My point is that the realities on the war ground in Ukraine and Russia matter more than the policy decisions in the capitals. Yes, funding matters, sanctions matter, deals can be struck, but what deals and whether they will hold will be determined locally 5/
I've seen that mistake made by the West and Russia in Ukraine multiple times
For example, in 2014, three European foreign ministers coming to Ukraine, brokering a peace between protesters and then pro-Russian president 6/
For example, in 2014, three European foreign ministers coming to Ukraine, brokering a peace between protesters and then pro-Russian president 6/
That peace agreement was actually successful. It was written down. There were specific points, detailed enough to be structurally possible to implement, including early elections, observers
The agreement lasted about 24 hours 7/
The agreement lasted about 24 hours 7/
After the agreement was reached, the three leaders of the protests went to the crowd, to the people, and talked to them about the great news of the peace between the pro-Russian president who was shooting them 8/
The bloodshed would be avoided, they said, There will be democratic elections. There will be observers. Great? Yeah! And the protesters rejected it 9/
By the way, none of the leaders ended up being president of Ukraine. All of these guys, which at that moment look to be legitimate representatives of the revolutionary forces in Ukraine, they turned out to be not in power later, at least not at the top 10/
And I've heard many similar ideas and conversations. Now, I hear this: the West will cut a deal and Zelensky would have to sell it
That's what I heard in 2014. But then it was the leaders of the protest who had to sell it 11/
That's what I heard in 2014. But then it was the leaders of the protest who had to sell it 11/
In 2015-2016, I've been to meetings in the US where another deal with Putin was discussed. Poroshenko would have to sell it, said the US advisors. Then, there were Minsk agreements I and II 12/
Neither Zelensky nor Poroshenko nor anyone else sold any of it. Why would it be any different now?
The realities on the ground, the mood among Ukrainian and Russian military and civilians will determine the future. The leaders can lead, but not where people don't want to go13/
The realities on the ground, the mood among Ukrainian and Russian military and civilians will determine the future. The leaders can lead, but not where people don't want to go13/
At least not for long. If someone thinks the Russian people are unwilling slaves to the Putin rule, they are mistaken. Yes, Putin leads but Russians willingly follow. And if they are willing to fight, if they think they can get a better deal by dying and killing, they will 14/
The same is true in Ukraine. It is impossible to sell to your nation, which lost hundreds of thousands, that you have to give up more territory, arms, NATO aspirations for a ceasefire, not backed up by any real security guarantees 15/
An unstable deal, a deal in which Ukraine can't stand on its won or together with allies to defend itself against future invasions by Russia will be just that - an unstable deal. It will turn this bloody mess into an even worse nightmare, the way Minsk agreements led to this 16/ x.com
The reverse is true as well. The only deal possible is a stable one. In which the contact line is clear, and enforced. Ukraine has weapons and support required to prevent future attacks. So, the key to any peace is to get Ukraine to a stage where it can defend itself 17X x.com
جاري تحميل الاقتراحات...