mikegriffith1
Mike Griffith
On one side, we have many conservatives accusing Zelensky of rejecting peace and being unreasonable because he wants a permanent peace deal that includes a security guarantee and because he does not want to cede any territory. On another side, we have many liberals accusing Trump of siding with Putin and selling out Ukraine because he is not agreeing to all of Zelensky's terms. Could a realistic, fair assessment be somewhere between these two extremes?
A unilateral U.S. guarantee of Ukraine's security would be virtually de facto NATO membership. It would obligate us to go to war with Russia if Russia invaded Ukraine again. Any future U.S. military intervention in Ukraine would require us to use some NATO nations as staging areas, just as we're doing now only more so. A NATO guarantee of Ukraine's security would be de facto NATO membership. Putin fiercely rejects either option, especially the latter option, as do most average Russians.
Yet, one certainly cannot blame Zelensky for wanting some kind of credible security guarantee, given Putin's track record of violating agreements.
I am not comfortable with Trump's posturing on Ukraine, especially his idiotic statement that Ukraine started the war. However, I recognize this may be a negotiating tactic to allow Putin to save some face while denying him control of most/all of Ukraine. I certainly hope that's what it is. If Trump truly believes that Ukraine started the war, he is horribly misinformed and is peddling Russian propaganda.
I also recognize that there is strong pro-Russian sentiment in three of Ukraine's eastern provinces (Kharkiv, Luhansk, and Donetsk), and that a peace deal may need to include ceding some territory in those provinces.
A few days ago, Trump told England's prime minister that Putin was willing to agree to a European peacekeeping force in Ukraine as part of a peace deal. If that's true, that could be significant, depending on the size and duration of the peacekeeping force.
I want a peace deal that gives Ukraine long-term independence and that permanently halts Russian interference in Ukraine's internal affairs. I would strongly prefer that Ukraine not be required to cede any territory. However, I could accept ceding some territory in the three eastern provinces if doing so permanently ended Russian efforts to topple Ukraine and gave Ukraine long-term independence.
I think it is too early to be forming firm, final opinions about the Ukraine negotiations. We need details about the various peace-deal proposals. Let's see where the negotiations go and what the final terms end up being.
If Trump does end up selling out Ukraine, I will never cease to criticize him for doing so. I have dear friends in Ukraine. But, if Trump ends up preserving Ukraine's long-term independence and puts an end to Russian interference in Ukraine, I will gladly congratulate him for doing so.
A unilateral U.S. guarantee of Ukraine's security would be virtually de facto NATO membership. It would obligate us to go to war with Russia if Russia invaded Ukraine again. Any future U.S. military intervention in Ukraine would require us to use some NATO nations as staging areas, just as we're doing now only more so. A NATO guarantee of Ukraine's security would be de facto NATO membership. Putin fiercely rejects either option, especially the latter option, as do most average Russians.
Yet, one certainly cannot blame Zelensky for wanting some kind of credible security guarantee, given Putin's track record of violating agreements.
I am not comfortable with Trump's posturing on Ukraine, especially his idiotic statement that Ukraine started the war. However, I recognize this may be a negotiating tactic to allow Putin to save some face while denying him control of most/all of Ukraine. I certainly hope that's what it is. If Trump truly believes that Ukraine started the war, he is horribly misinformed and is peddling Russian propaganda.
I also recognize that there is strong pro-Russian sentiment in three of Ukraine's eastern provinces (Kharkiv, Luhansk, and Donetsk), and that a peace deal may need to include ceding some territory in those provinces.
A few days ago, Trump told England's prime minister that Putin was willing to agree to a European peacekeeping force in Ukraine as part of a peace deal. If that's true, that could be significant, depending on the size and duration of the peacekeeping force.
I want a peace deal that gives Ukraine long-term independence and that permanently halts Russian interference in Ukraine's internal affairs. I would strongly prefer that Ukraine not be required to cede any territory. However, I could accept ceding some territory in the three eastern provinces if doing so permanently ended Russian efforts to topple Ukraine and gave Ukraine long-term independence.
I think it is too early to be forming firm, final opinions about the Ukraine negotiations. We need details about the various peace-deal proposals. Let's see where the negotiations go and what the final terms end up being.
If Trump does end up selling out Ukraine, I will never cease to criticize him for doing so. I have dear friends in Ukraine. But, if Trump ends up preserving Ukraine's long-term independence and puts an end to Russian interference in Ukraine, I will gladly congratulate him for doing so.
