These five reasons are being shared for the purpose of hopefully inspiring Kiev to pragmatically reconsider its presently recalcitrant position to peace talks with Moscow. They’re meant to be objective insofar as they acknowledge Kiev’s interests as its leadership understands them to be (despite the author disagreeing with the aforesaid of course) while still attempting to strike a fair balance between those same interests, its patrons’, and Moscow’s.
Just read Zel negotiating contract with BlackRock to rebuild Ukraine? They are like the new Halliburton. War profiteers. sickening.
From invading Ukraine in a "three-day" Special Operation to getting their propagandists to e-beg for peace talks 10 months later.
It's been a rough 2022 for Russia.
... and why this will never happen:
1. Ukraine is not run by the regime in Kiev, but by US; it is Uncle Sam who should agree to peace talks... sadly:
2. Their trustworthiness is zero... so what guarantees could possibly Russia have that anything signed will be respected... ever?
3. Negotiated cease of hostilities will probably not be accepted by the Russian people as the toll has been too great already.
The current situation is way past negotiations, I'm afraid.
5 of a long list of completely rational reasons why Kiev should come to the table. Sadly, I have seen nothing to suggest the thug running the country is concerned with rationality. He’s getting rich beyond his wildest dreams off US tax dollars by sending his young men to slaughter and making plans to get even richer off US pension money with blackrock.
As others have pointed out, the puppet regime in Kiev has no agency or authority to negotiate anything. Follow the money, follow the power. Washington's neo-con State Department will keep this gravy train going for as long as it can, because if you never experience any consequences for incompetence but are instead rewarded for it, your incompetence grows. Tell me who got fired for Iraq, Afghanistan, Vietnam, all of which were disastrous for the U.S. tax payer but lucrative for U.S. neo-cons, the all-powerful U.S. Military Industrial Complex (whose budget keeps going up and up) and the parasites that run the U.S. surveillance state and propaganda outlets which are hilariously treated as actual news outlets. Russia will have to fight this until the people in Western Countries start revolting against this scam.
The US spent billions on thec2014 Coup, managed buildingv46 biolabs, and controls Ukraine with billions more. There are videos of Zelenski playing the piano with his private member, but am I unable to post the sites.
According to me freezing the Line of Control with a tacit recognition of the actual status quo would see all contenders defeated.
The Ukrainians because, in addition to Crimea, they should accept further territorial losses and I do not think that the extremists who actually run the country can and will accept this.
The Russians (probably the most loosers) because, not only, would they have a part of the newly annexed territories still under Ukrainian control, but, above all, because they would not have changed anything the problem of the security of their western borders: they would have moved the line of a few kilometres. They would also give the Western bloc time to replenish its currently absolutely exhausted war arsenals and then resume the conflict in the name of Ukrainian territorial integrity (remember the fate of Slavonia and Kraijna?)
Not even the Westerners (probably the real winners) could accept such an agreement (albeit absolutely in favor of their own interests) because they have so fomented anti-Russian propaganda that any territorial concession (even if only tacit) would make the current leadership totally weak in the face of their public opinion: the local oppositions would immediately compare this attitude to that held by Clement Attlee in the face of the rise of Nazism