Should Ukraine give up?

[jimbob]

If Putin gets away unpunished for his aggression, then the West has signed it;s own death warrant. Putin will not stop.
Besided, why the hell should Ukraine ..or anyone..ever trust Putin again.
We have a new Hitler on our hands,and some people just do not want to face up to the reality.

Yup.

 

[BobTheCoward]

If Putin gets away unpunished for his aggression, then the West has signed it;s own death warrant. Putin will not stop.
Besided, why the hell should Ukraine ..or anyone..ever trust Putin again.
We have a new Hitler on our hands,and some people just do not want to face up to the reality.

The reality is the world does know he is the new Hitler and is absolutely confident they can use military force to achieve the same fate.

The problem is Hitler had people fight to the bitter end and committed suicide. What does suicide look like for a leader with thousands of nuclear weapons?

 

[shemp]

I think Ukraine should accept the following peace terms:

-no NATO membership.

-Crimea, Donbas districts belong to Russia.

-no nuclear weapons.

-speaking Russian in schools must be allowed again.

-Russian made one of Ukraine's official languages.




Anything more than this would just not be acceptable.

Now it's acceptable.

 

[Michel H]

I think Ukraine should accept the following peace terms:

-no NATO membership.

-Crimea, Donbas districts belong to Russia.

-no nuclear weapons.

-speaking Russian in schools must be allowed again.

-Russian made one of Ukraine's official languages.




Anything more than this would just not be acceptable.

This seems to be a fairly good peace plan to me (though it's not exactly the one I would personally favor).

If implemented, it could probably save many lives and prevent a lot of destructions.

When you say:

Donbas districts belong to Russia

,
do you mean the whole of Donbass, or just the current two people's republics? (Russia actually doesn't want to annex the two republics, it just wants them independent; you are here giving to Russia more than what Russia is asking).

And do you have an opinion about sanctions imposed on Russia?

 

[theprestige]

I think Ukraine should accept the following peace terms:

-no NATO membership.

-Crimea, Donbas districts belong to Russia.

-no nuclear weapons.

-speaking Russian in schools must be allowed again.

-Russian made one of Ukraine's official languages.

No NATO membership is an obvious suicide pact.

Making Russian official is just pandering to their oppressor.

Nuclear weapons were never on the table.

Your entire peace proposal is morally bankrupt and blatantly anti-Ukraine.

Anything more than this would just not be acceptable.

None of this is acceptable to me.

What terms do you think Russia should accept?

 

[Oystein]

...
Making Russian official is just pandering to their oppressor.
...

Abject, terrible nonsense, indicative of you not knowing basic facts.

It is perfectly normal, standard, almost mandatory that languages spoken by significant regional minorities and even majorities of a population be official languages.

Russian is widely spoken by high percentages of the population in huge part of Ukraine.
NOT allowing it as an official language (i.e. the language in which citizens are entitled to communicate with government agencies on any level from country to local) was crass, obvious, blatant disregard of the norms known in liberal democracies based on universal human rights.

It was enormously STUPID of Ukraine to have ever started playing that game years ago. It was nothing but a hostile gesture of pure, dumb nationalism.

 

[crescent]

No NATO membership is an obvious suicide pact.

If I were King of the World:

I think they could propose allowing Ukraine into NATO, but with limits on how many non-Ukrainian NATO troops could be in Ukraine at any one time - like 1000 or so. Enough for training and logistical support, but nowhere near enough to invade Russia. No nuclear weapons in Ukraine - but it still gets that mutual defense safety.

Perhaps sharper limits on how many non-Ukrainian NATO troops could be east of the Dnieper at any given time. Those limits would be tied to Russian adherence to other aspects of the agreement. Russia breaks the rules, NATO gets to add more people.

Russian and Ukrainian forces pull out of Donbass and separatist militia are disarmed, UN peacekeepers go in. Both districts get divided along the 2014-2022 line of control, with UN supervised independence referendums on both sides of the lines of control. Real, free referendums with no Russian interference.

Russian citizens who didn't live there pre-2014 don't get to vote in that, but Ukrainian citizens who lived there pre-2014 do get to vote even if they have not lived there since. That could result in the separatist-controlled areas staying separate, in which case Russian troops could re-enter them, subject to limitations on numbers and weaponry.

If the referendums go in favor of staying in Ukraine, then Ukraine gets to send troops back in. The U.N. peacekeeping force would be inherently temporary, although U.N. observers could be permanent.

Crimea stays Russian, Ukraine delivers water to it. Russia pays for it. A lot. A big fat check every year for decades, a mortgage payment on the purchase of Crimea and for water delivery. Limits on the number of ground forces Russia can post there - it's a Navy port, not an Army base. Ukraine gets free access under the Kerch strait bridge, everyday forever. Russia can't use training exercises or security concerns as a pretext to block Ukrainian access - ever.

Allow Russian to be an official language. Schools can teach in it, it can be used for legal proceedings. That said, nobody should be forced to be taught or do court and legal proceeding in Russian. As a Yankee, I struggle with this - English is the de facto official language of the U.S., but does not appear to have any legal standing in that regard. English as the Official Language is a political issue here. I'm not totally certain how official languages work, other than some level of recognition in the development of school books.

 

[Oystein]

... I'm not totally certain official languages work, other than some level of recognition in the development of school books.

You meant "not totally certain how official languages work"?

An official language is the language with which offices of the state communicate with citizens - it's a language in which laws are published, court proceedings are conducted, and citizens can petition government, submit declarations, etc.

To not allow native Russian-speaking Ukrainians to do their business with government in Russian, especially where the local government offices are also staffed with native speakers of Russian, was blatant discrimination borne out of spite, hatred and blind nationalism. One of several far less than smart moves on the part of the Ukrainians in the lead-ups to 2014 and 2022. Just failed to take the high road.

 

[theprestige]

Abject, terrible nonsense, indicative of you not knowing basic facts.

It is perfectly normal, standard, almost mandatory that languages spoken by significant regional minorities and even majorities of a population be official languages.

Russian is widely spoken by high percentages of the population in huge part of Ukraine.
NOT allowing it as an official language (i.e. the language in which citizens are entitled to communicate with government agencies on any level from country to local) was crass, obvious, blatant disregard of the norms known in liberal democracies based on universal human rights.

It was enormously STUPID of Ukraine to have ever started playing that game years ago. It was nothing but a hostile gesture of pure, dumb nationalism.

All of that may be true. It should be entirely between the government of Ukraine and its citizens. It should not be a point of negotiation in peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.

Such a peace term would be Russia trying to put a fake humanitarian veneer on the crime against humanity which they have committed. We should not hold Ukraine obligated to consider it, or even acknowledge it.

Later, when all this is over, if Ukraine still exists as an independent sovereign state, that would be a good time to remonstrate with them to consider additional language support as a matter of public policy. Doing it right now would just be taking Russia's side.

 

[crescent]

You meant "not totally certain how official languages work"?

Yes - corrected. Thank you.

 

[Oystein]

... We should not hold Ukraine obligated to consider it, or even acknowledge it. ...

We absolutely 100% should.

It should be a non-negotiable prerequisite, a sine-qua-non, before any talks about joining EU ever even just begin.

 

[Andy_Ross]

If I were King of the World:

I think they could propose allowing Ukraine into NATO, but with limits on how many non-Ukrainian NATO troops could be in Ukraine at any one time - like 1000 or so. Enough for training and logistical support, but nowhere near enough to invade Russia. No nuclear weapons in Ukraine - but it still gets that mutual defense safety.

Perhaps sharper limits on how many non-Ukrainian NATO troops could be east of the Dnieper at any given time. Those limits would be tied to Russian adherence to other aspects of the agreement. Russia breaks the rules, NATO gets to add more people.

Russian and Ukrainian forces pull out of Donbass and separatist militia are disarmed, UN peacekeepers go in. Both districts get divided along the 2014-2022 line of control, with UN supervised independence referendums on both sides of the lines of control. Real, free referendums with no Russian interference.

Russian citizens who didn't live there pre-2014 don't get to vote in that, but Ukrainian citizens who lived there pre-2014 do get to vote even if they have not lived there since. That could result in the separatist-controlled areas staying separate, in which case Russian troops could re-enter them, subject to limitations on numbers and weaponry.

If the referendums go in favor of staying in Ukraine, then Ukraine gets to send troops back in. The U.N. peacekeeping force would be inherently temporary, although U.N. observers could be permanent.

Crimea stays Russian, Ukraine delivers water to it. Russia pays for it. A lot. A big fat check every year for decades, a mortgage payment on the purchase of Crimea and for water delivery. Limits on the number of ground forces Russia can post there - it's a Navy port, not an Army base. Ukraine gets free access under the Kerch strait bridge, everyday forever. Russia can't use training exercises or security concerns as a pretext to block Ukrainian access - ever.

Allow Russian to be an official language. Schools can teach in it, it can be used for legal proceedings. That said, nobody should be forced to be taught or do court and legal proceeding in Russian. As a Yankee, I struggle with this - English is the de facto official language of the U.S., but does not appear to have any legal standing in that regard. English as the Official Language is a political issue here. I'm not totally certain how official languages work, other than some level of recognition in the development of school books.

So a second rate NATO member with a lesser status than any ofthe other members?

That's a good plan.

 

[Craig4]

This seems to be a fairly good peace plan to me (though it's not exactly the one I would personally favor).

If implemented, it could probably save many lives and prevent a lot of destructions.

When you say:
,
do you mean the whole of Donbass, or just the current two people's republics? (Russia actually doesn't want to annex the two republics, it just wants them independent; you are here giving to Russia more than what Russia is asking).

And do you have an opinion about sanctions imposed on Russia?

What the Ukrainians should do is instead of accepting surrenders, tell Russian soldiers to march on Moscow and kill Putin. Putin would see them killed so they should return the favor.

The west should make the sanctions harder on average Russians. Russia knows how to deal with leaders who get them into unpopular wars and economic collapse. Just keep threatening Putin's life and Little Vlady will go the way of Little Nicky.

 

[Sherman Bay]

Do that and just give Putin the rest of Eastern Europe and Taiwan to China to save us all the trouble.

That should work. The technique was honed to perfection by Neville Chamberlain in 1938.

 

[TellyKNeasuss]

Deleted

 

[Wildy]

Kadyrov is apparently in Ukraine and believes that they should give up.

I wonder if the same thing will happen to him that happened to the last Chechen commander sent there?

 

[Vixen]

Making Ukrainians whose mother tongue is Russian speak/read Ukrainian is the exact same form of oppression.

I thought that granting Russian a legal standing in regions where it is in fact a significant minority (almost everywhere) or even majority language really goes without saying, a nobrainer. Giving up arms, Donbas - not so much.

In the context of the OP who suggested accepting conditions including letting Donestk and Luhansk be separate Russian states, together with Crimea, why should Russian also be an official language of the remaining Ukraine proper? There is nothing to stop ethnic Russians speaking their own language. The issue is of it being an 'official language'. For example, having road signs and public notices also in Russian.

It was the USSR who flooded East Europe with ethnic Russians in the first place, so I don't see how they can still claim majority rights after invading and annexing Russian majority populations. These days, schoolkids find English, German or French much more useful than having to learn Russian. It should be optional, not compulsory.

In any case, it looks like talks might now be hopeful. If the issue of language is the deal-breaker, then of course, Ukraine should just let it be. (At least for now.)

See this tweet put out by a Russian agency, showing their aim as flooding the west with Russification, proclaiming it as a human right to speak their mother tongue, cleverly trying to make out it is somehow racist to not let them dominate.

 

[Planigale]

I think Ukraine should accept the following peace terms:

-no NATO membership.

-Crimea, Donbas districts belong to Russia.

-no nuclear weapons.

-speaking Russian in schools must be allowed again.

-Russian made one of Ukraine's official languages.




Anything more than this would just not be acceptable.

At the beginning I said that the destruction of cities and the deaths of people was not worth the insistence on NATO membership.

The definition of the right to self determination and the language rights of minority groups are things the 'West' should have been requiring of Ukraine.

While nothing can justify the actions of Putin, if you are next to a bad tempered bear you don't poke it. Ukraine did take a series of deliberately provocative acts some of which (like language rights) are dubious under international law.

Ukraine being in NATO is a 'Cuban missile crisis' moment for Russia. The US was prepared to go to war over this. There have been many senior US diplomats who said that they advised against expansion of NATO east, and that a demilitarised neutral buffer was safer.

By militarising the civilian population and turning residential areas into strong points turns these into legitimate military targets. The Ukraine government could have adopted an open city policy. Russia never had enough troops to occupy all of Ukraine.

Putin is going to lose power relatively soon (probably by death from natural causes given his age). As we see from nationalist movements round the world the existence of nations does not disappear because of political systems.

I know others disagree but I think temporary dishonour is better than death and destruction. The problem is that with so many deaths and so much destruction it is now very difficult for either side to give up anything; because the cost would be too high. The best time for peace was right at the beginning.

 

[Planigale]

You meant "not totally certain how official languages work"?

An official language is the language with which offices of the state communicate with citizens - it's a language in which laws are published, court proceedings are conducted, and citizens can petition government, submit declarations, etc.

To not allow native Russian-speaking Ukrainians to do their business with government in Russian, especially where the local government offices are also staffed with native speakers of Russian, was blatant discrimination borne out of spite, hatred and blind nationalism. One of several far less than smart moves on the part of the Ukrainians in the lead-ups to 2014 and 2022. Just failed to take the high road.

This is correct, and it does the 'west' no credit to fail to recognise the failings of the Ukrainian government and say that if they win then the post-war settlement must protect the rights of ethnic Russians.

Of course this does not justify Russia invading Ukraine.

 

[Oystein]

In the context of the OP who suggested accepting conditions including letting Donestk and Luhansk be separate Russian states, together with Crimea, why should Russian also be an official language of the remaining Ukraine proper?.

For exactly, precisely the reasons I outlined in my post. Evfn after subtracting Donbas and Crimea (which I oppose!!), Russian remains a VERY significant minority language in most parts of Ukraine, and even a majority in some communities,

There is nothing to stop ethnic Russians speaking their own language. The issue is of it being an 'official language'. For example, having road signs and public notices also in Russian. .

Why did you pick the absolutely least important aspect of an official language, and not one of the many truly importang aspects, suchvas the right to write to government agencies, courts etc in your native languahüge instead of one the state FORCES upon you?

It was the USSR who flooded East Europe with ethnic Russians in the first place, so I don't see how they can still claim majority rights after invading and annexing Russian majority populations. These days, schoolkids find English, German or French much more useful than having to learn Russian. It should be optional, not compulsory..

Strawman.
An official language is not compulsory for citizens, its compulsory for offices of the state in the service of citizens. Big difference!
And your stressing "majority rights" is exactly the core of the problem: a liberal democracy sharing values with the EU is premised on the realization that MINORITY RIGHTS are in need of preservation and protection.

Sheesh!