Putin had better play hard ball on these negotiations after such an unnecessary atrocity. He has said himself the West is not "agreement capable" nor is it to be trusted. He should be going after an unconditional surrender. He has to make sure Ukraine remains unarmed and a DMZ.
As long as NATO exists it is a threat to Russia regardless of any agreement. It walked away from the Minsk Agreements, and moved up to Russia's after agreeing not to, and has zero integrity.
At a time when the world is escalating to greater wars Russia can show no weakness to the crazies in Washington. The bottom line is that a peace treaty is a piece of paper Washington will tear up any time it wishes to.
Until the mess in Washington is cleaned up there can be no trust and that is years in the making if ever
Well, I suppose you can write to him. In spite of all the times some propagandized idiot has called me a Putin puppet I have no pipeline to, or income from, the Kremlin.
Personally, the only thing I can think of that would make Putin even consider letting Ukraine join NATO, conditional or otherwise, is some need to let the US Empire save some face. Well, there's precedent. Khrushchev let Kennedy get away keeping that bit about pulling American missiles out of Turkey in exchange for Russian ones leaving Cuba.
Kennedy did that to save his own ass as the military was very hostile to him and he didn't want to embarrass them further by the public knowing the USA already had missiles aimed at Russia. A leader the stature of Kennedy won't be seen any time soon. Putin is a great leader and that is why Western elites despise him. The lunatic fringe running Washington only sees the world down a gun barrel.
I respect Hersch greatly but I'm still a skeptic and agree with both of the previous comments - Hersch sometimes seems to reflect how the West sees Russia and not how Russia sees itself....The topic is very well dealt with through RT's cross-talk in which Nicolai Petro (U of RI) and Gilbert Doctorow discuss the topic - a discussion which illuminates Hersch arguments (Russia doesn't need-want) Ukraine territory and how it is/has fulfilled one of its major goals in demilitarization.....It's other goal is protecting minority rights....In short the cross-talk discussion and an article by Petro appearing in Anti-War.com should amplify what Hersch is presenting....Some flaws I see in the Hersch arguments - perhaps I missed them or he didn't make them strongly enough were - who speaks for Ukraine? - why should Russia trust a Minsk 3? why should Russia stop if it is winning....etc., etc.
On a totally mutually exclusive topic - here is a side advertisement for those Russophiles/armchair spies/lovers of foreign cinema who may still be reading my comment...I recently and serendipitously discovered a Soviet (1973) spy-thriller which is on Youtube - Title is Seventeen Moments in Spring and stars the great Russian-Soviet actor (Academy Award winning War and Peace) Vyacheslav Tikhonov...The twelve segment series is filled with history, historical footage and intrigue as well as some good music and is rated an illustrious 8.8 on the international movie data base....a very good escape from the multiple political crises/challenges we are facing.
These are only military terms. Would the remains of Ukraine be left with a pro-Bandera anti-Russian culture, where Ukrainian and English are the only official languages (yes, English was added)? Would Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk and Kharkov remain as targets of the Ukrainian government? Who will develop Ukraine, and what will become of expenses, like heating - ours went up hugely?
While ending the death and destruction is good, the consequences for those still in the Russian-speaking areas still need to be considered.
Much as I appreciate the summary, on these terms, Ukraine would be sad, empty, expensive and dangerous. I don't know how many refugees would return to Ukraine, or would be welcome - including us. It MIGHT be good for Russia, but Russia would then have a rabid anti-Russian Ukraine as a neighbor.
I suspect it's just being floated, if it has any basis in fact, especially as Ukraine is running out of people and money.
Yah, I have to think that Russia will insist on Russian speakers in Ukraine being guaranteed some rights. I think Hersh got a partially correct picture, but there's something missing. It just doesn't quite...fit.
Thank you for that! Scott Ritter's opinion is always welcome. As I said, there's something missing. I don't know what it is, but it may very well be a genuinely neutral, or Russian-leaning, Ukraine is in fact non-negotiable for Putin. I can't blame him if that's true.
I also don't see Russia agreeing to Ukrainian occupation of any part of those eastern oblasts if the majority vote to join the Russian Federation, but that's something that can be hashed out later.
Sounds like Hersh's source is yanking someone's chain.
There simply isn't any trust, at this juncture, that US/NATO are capable of keeping a promise. Ever less so with a likely lame-duck Biden administration.
As for China, the whole affair is an endless geopolitical gift to them. China gets recognition as the responsible party, while the US burns out what were by far its most powerful allies - EU - against the brick wall of Russia. Icing on the cake: Russian natural resources are (1) sold cheaply to China, and (2) are used to backstop a sanctions-proof global financial system free of DC's sabotage.
My guess is, all these scare-stories about imminent peace, are just to help along the next round of funding.
Wow... Putin's okay with Ukraine joining NATO? That just doesn't sound like him. Perhaps the spirit of Christmas and a desire for peace has soften his heart some. I can see some neolib political cartoonist draw him as the Grinch with his heart growing larger and larger... That there could be peace in that part of the world before the end of the year is welcome news.
(And thanks for following Sy Hersh for us poor folks!)
Am I being completely naive when I ask: Why can’t all of the European powers, plus China and the U.S. push for a great power peace conference like the ones that periodically took place in Europe during the 19th century after some squalid little war, to arrange the peace between Russia and Ukraine and end on a positive note, with all the nations signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty and neutrality of Ukraine, with all the signatories agreeing to attack any country that violates the treaty?
Putin had better play hard ball on these negotiations after such an unnecessary atrocity. He has said himself the West is not "agreement capable" nor is it to be trusted. He should be going after an unconditional surrender. He has to make sure Ukraine remains unarmed and a DMZ.
As long as NATO exists it is a threat to Russia regardless of any agreement. It walked away from the Minsk Agreements, and moved up to Russia's after agreeing not to, and has zero integrity.
At a time when the world is escalating to greater wars Russia can show no weakness to the crazies in Washington. The bottom line is that a peace treaty is a piece of paper Washington will tear up any time it wishes to.
Until the mess in Washington is cleaned up there can be no trust and that is years in the making if ever
Well, I suppose you can write to him. In spite of all the times some propagandized idiot has called me a Putin puppet I have no pipeline to, or income from, the Kremlin.
Personally, the only thing I can think of that would make Putin even consider letting Ukraine join NATO, conditional or otherwise, is some need to let the US Empire save some face. Well, there's precedent. Khrushchev let Kennedy get away keeping that bit about pulling American missiles out of Turkey in exchange for Russian ones leaving Cuba.
Kennedy did that to save his own ass as the military was very hostile to him and he didn't want to embarrass them further by the public knowing the USA already had missiles aimed at Russia. A leader the stature of Kennedy won't be seen any time soon. Putin is a great leader and that is why Western elites despise him. The lunatic fringe running Washington only sees the world down a gun barrel.
I respect Hersch greatly but I'm still a skeptic and agree with both of the previous comments - Hersch sometimes seems to reflect how the West sees Russia and not how Russia sees itself....The topic is very well dealt with through RT's cross-talk in which Nicolai Petro (U of RI) and Gilbert Doctorow discuss the topic - a discussion which illuminates Hersch arguments (Russia doesn't need-want) Ukraine territory and how it is/has fulfilled one of its major goals in demilitarization.....It's other goal is protecting minority rights....In short the cross-talk discussion and an article by Petro appearing in Anti-War.com should amplify what Hersch is presenting....Some flaws I see in the Hersch arguments - perhaps I missed them or he didn't make them strongly enough were - who speaks for Ukraine? - why should Russia trust a Minsk 3? why should Russia stop if it is winning....etc., etc.
On a totally mutually exclusive topic - here is a side advertisement for those Russophiles/armchair spies/lovers of foreign cinema who may still be reading my comment...I recently and serendipitously discovered a Soviet (1973) spy-thriller which is on Youtube - Title is Seventeen Moments in Spring and stars the great Russian-Soviet actor (Academy Award winning War and Peace) Vyacheslav Tikhonov...The twelve segment series is filled with history, historical footage and intrigue as well as some good music and is rated an illustrious 8.8 on the international movie data base....a very good escape from the multiple political crises/challenges we are facing.
These are only military terms. Would the remains of Ukraine be left with a pro-Bandera anti-Russian culture, where Ukrainian and English are the only official languages (yes, English was added)? Would Odessa, Dnepropetrovsk and Kharkov remain as targets of the Ukrainian government? Who will develop Ukraine, and what will become of expenses, like heating - ours went up hugely?
While ending the death and destruction is good, the consequences for those still in the Russian-speaking areas still need to be considered.
Much as I appreciate the summary, on these terms, Ukraine would be sad, empty, expensive and dangerous. I don't know how many refugees would return to Ukraine, or would be welcome - including us. It MIGHT be good for Russia, but Russia would then have a rabid anti-Russian Ukraine as a neighbor.
I suspect it's just being floated, if it has any basis in fact, especially as Ukraine is running out of people and money.
Yah, I have to think that Russia will insist on Russian speakers in Ukraine being guaranteed some rights. I think Hersh got a partially correct picture, but there's something missing. It just doesn't quite...fit.
Pardon one more comment, but this a personal issue for me with family in and refugees from Ukraine.
Scott Ritter just posted on Twitter:
There are two main problems with the narrative Seymour Hersh’s latest source paints about Russia and Ukraine.
One is that Russia would stop fighting without liberating all of Russia’s constitutionally established territory.
Two is that Russia would allow Ukraine to join NATO.
It’s as if Hersh’s source thinks Russia lost this war.
https://x.com/realscottritter/status/1730987024893759564?s=46
Thank you for that! Scott Ritter's opinion is always welcome. As I said, there's something missing. I don't know what it is, but it may very well be a genuinely neutral, or Russian-leaning, Ukraine is in fact non-negotiable for Putin. I can't blame him if that's true.
I also don't see Russia agreeing to Ukrainian occupation of any part of those eastern oblasts if the majority vote to join the Russian Federation, but that's something that can be hashed out later.
Sounds like Hersh's source is yanking someone's chain.
There simply isn't any trust, at this juncture, that US/NATO are capable of keeping a promise. Ever less so with a likely lame-duck Biden administration.
As for China, the whole affair is an endless geopolitical gift to them. China gets recognition as the responsible party, while the US burns out what were by far its most powerful allies - EU - against the brick wall of Russia. Icing on the cake: Russian natural resources are (1) sold cheaply to China, and (2) are used to backstop a sanctions-proof global financial system free of DC's sabotage.
My guess is, all these scare-stories about imminent peace, are just to help along the next round of funding.
I don't think that the source is yanking someone's chain. I think that Hersh was given
false info on purpose. If it turns out to be false, his info about NS2 will be discredited.
It's a nice trick to play on someone's good reputation.
Since the Kremlin complained mainly (2007) about NATO's expansion I won't believe
this story at all.
Gee thanks for paying the paywall fee.
Wow... Putin's okay with Ukraine joining NATO? That just doesn't sound like him. Perhaps the spirit of Christmas and a desire for peace has soften his heart some. I can see some neolib political cartoonist draw him as the Grinch with his heart growing larger and larger... That there could be peace in that part of the world before the end of the year is welcome news.
(And thanks for following Sy Hersh for us poor folks!)
Am I being completely naive when I ask: Why can’t all of the European powers, plus China and the U.S. push for a great power peace conference like the ones that periodically took place in Europe during the 19th century after some squalid little war, to arrange the peace between Russia and Ukraine and end on a positive note, with all the nations signing a treaty guaranteeing the sovereignty and neutrality of Ukraine, with all the signatories agreeing to attack any country that violates the treaty?