this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
1138 points (97.2% liked)

World News

32288 readers
488 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has said the death of Yevgeny Prigozhin – the Russian mercenary leader whose plane crashed weeks after he led a mutiny against Moscow’s military leadership – shows what happens when people make deals with Russian leader Vladimir Putin.

As Ukraine’s counteroffensive moves into a fourth month, with only modest gains to show so far, Zelensky told CNN’s Fareed Zakaria he rejected suggestions it was time to negotiate peace with the Kremlin.

“When you want to have a compromise or a dialogue with somebody, you cannot do it with a liar,” Volodymyr Zelensky said.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 216 points 1 year ago (53 children)

Withdrawing troops, returning stolen land, children, prisoners and paying for damages.. thats all i would accept. Nothing less.

[–] [email protected] 41 points 1 year ago (7 children)

A 'Treaty of Versailles' type solution is not a good idea for durable peace though, harsh reparations, despite any sense they might be 'fair', seldom lead to both countries returning to be prosperous democratic countries (and to be clear, neither is a capitulation by Ukraine - that would be seen by Putin as locking in its current gains, with no real incentive not to try again for more despite what the treaty might say).

The best outcome for everyone is if Russia ends up being a genuinely pluralistic democracy (i.e. anyone in Russia can have political views, and the public selects its leadership in free and fair elections). Then Ukraine can normalise relations with Russia, and Russia stops being a threat to democratic institutions across the world as a whole.

I think the best way of thinking about it is not that Ukraine has a Russia problem, but rather that Ukraine and Russia have an oligarch problem (with Putin chief amongst them). Therefore, in a fair world, the oligarchs, and not the Russian people, would pay. It is true that Russians (and indeed some Ukrainians in occupied regions) have been radicalised by the oligarchs, so some kind of deradicalisation would be needed even if the oligarchs disappeared.

Solutions that look to negotiate how to reduce corruption and authoritarianism in Russia from the top are therefore the most likely to succeed long term. Shorter term solutions could include a negotiated end to hostilities coupled with agreements for Ukraine to join a defensive alliance that the oligarchs wouldn't consider provoking - which could be followed up by a carrot approach to easing sanctions in exchange for progressive movements towards genuine Russian democracy. This might give oligarchs enough push to take off ramps to cash in what they have plundered already, and slowly be replaced by less corrupt alternatives going forward.

Recovery from oligarchy for Russia might also by costly for Russia though - essential assets plundered from the USSR are now in private hands through crony capitalism; the best solution would be for many of the major ones to go back to or be rebuilt under state ownership, under genuine democratic leadership. But that is likely easier said than done given the state of Russia.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Solutions that look to negotiate how to reduce corruption and authoritarianism in Russia from the top are therefore the most likely to succeed long term.

This may be true but the negotiations are with a dictator. It's not like Putin is going to step down so that the problem is resolved peacefully.

[–] meldroc 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yep. The only way to make progress on that front is to serve Putin some polonium tea...

[–] [email protected] 8 points 1 year ago (1 children)

That won't work, it's not just Putin doing this alone you know. You'd need a powerful (the most powerful, actually) faction inside the Russian state apparatus that want to just give up, and there's no real reason to think there is such a group. And no anti-war opposition has enough support to do a coup or win elections.

No defeatist is getting into power. It's not going to happen unless Lenin rises from the dead.

[–] Serinus 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I bet if they had a real option, they'd love to stop sending their kids to die.

Saying as much now gets you thrown in jail.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 year ago (5 children)

Socialism worked in Russia: it dragged hundreds of millions of people out of subsistence farming and turned the USSR into an economic powerhouse. Of course, the collapse of the USSR showed the failings of an aggressively socialist state, but the funny thing is that China already has the solution: a market-based economy with strong state control. Putin doesn't dare piss off the oligarchs though, so we're stuck with this crony bullshit.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (8 children)

| Socialism worked in Russia:

Bullshit. Prosperity advanced much more in the west than in the Soviet Union, or anywhere in the soviet bloc. Corruption was rampant. Lying was rampant. People were miserable. Cultural genocide was the name of the game. Subjugated people hated it, and have fared significantly better since getting out. The only people who seem to be nostalgic about the USSR is the Russians, because they lost the ability to benefit from the slave labor of conquered vassal states.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 year ago (1 children)

In what universe have corruption and lying not been rampant in "the west" over the last hundred years? Did you just pull this comment out of a book titled "Red Scare Propaganda?"

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (7 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Cryan24 32 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And Russia Surrenders a 10km deep strip of its own land around Ukraine to act as a DMZ.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

With what military do you plan on using to support this?

[–] [email protected] 20 points 1 year ago

And a 3rd party enforced DMZ on the border.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

If only you also were in the position to dictate this to Russia. Even the US isn't in this position, and will never be.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (7 children)

Losing thousands (possibly tens or hundreds of thousands) more soldiers forcing that.

Playing macho may seem cool from your chair, but if Ukraine could force that without significant losses, it would already have by now.

Their behavior also shows that they don't see their victory as that close and certain. Even though the statement itself is by a stronger side definitely, unlike in the first few months since the war started.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Eastern European countries love their "macho" leaders. Putin has been doing the whole shtick since forever and Zelensky started it too since 2022. Fucking hate this shit.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Lots of countries have this problem. Their people are looking for strong leaders, not smart leaders, and many interpret bullying as strength.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago

Well, it sometimes pays off. You can see how Pashinyan is regarded as opposed to Zelensky or literally anyone not as miserable. Looking weak is bad. Humans are still apes. And politicians in some sense are even more apes than the general population - they mostly participate in some free for all without any moral boundaries, which is an environment more macho-friendly than any other.

I mostly meant that people calling for Ukrainian offensive don't quite feel that it's not a movie, most of the soldiers are mobilized men, and Ukraine has already tried a few times. Turns out it's not as cheap as one would have thought.

They likely want to stockpile weapons, train people better (especially commanders, since their recent attempts were just as Soviet-styled as what Russia does), make preparations. Maybe wait for something unexpected happening for Russia leading to it being distracted.

Or maybe they want to wait until the terrain freezes, so that it would be easier to push. Or the other way around - due to Russian problems in logistics, they want to push in the shortest possible window before frosts, so that territory taken would be easier to hold. I dunno, I'm not a military expert.

load more comments (6 replies)
load more comments (48 replies)