8
US's Blinken says no to any Ukraine peace deal that doesn't include total Russian withdrawal (apnews.com)
submitted 3 years ago* by to c/worldnews@lemmy.ml
124 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

“We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression,” Blinken said in a speech in Finland, which recently became NATO’s newest member and shares a long border with Russia.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 3 years ago (11 children)

Why does the United States get absolutely any say in a peace deal between Ukraine and Russia, there meddling stopped the last peace deals, and this is really none of their buisness. Let Ukraine set there terms and negotiate for themselves.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (7 children)

    While I am at it, The PRC has been trying for months to broker peace and has Russia at the table, why doesn't the US let Ukraine go to the table and negotiate, The United States has no right to be king of the world and has no right to be setting any terms for these talks.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (6 children)

    It's very ironic how you are fine with china's involvement but not the US'

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (5 children)

    The difference is china is merely acting as a medator, a nutural 3rd party whos job is to 1) host the negotiations 2) help the 2 sides truly hear each other and come to a compromise. If you listen to what China says about this and how they interact with Russia its in keeping with this role, that all they want is to see the fighting end. The United States by dictating terms has forfitted there ability to fufill this role, China however has sugested nor offered any terms, only a table to talk at. If you really don't want China it doesn't have to be China, but they already have one side seated, and I would like to hear who else you would propose?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (3 children)

    So if the war end right now would that mean Russia would withdraw it's troops from Ukraine? No it wouldn't, so implicitly engaging in peace talks while Russia holds territory in Ukraine would mean conceding territory. Why would china want that? Isn't that meddling in the war?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] 0 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    They say they want peace and are willing to hold talks, I am mot sure what your getting at, in no war ever has the beginning of peace talks been the cesation of the war, and how the war ends is determined by said peace talks, talks that of right bow are not happening.

    Now if you are trying to argue that the mere act of trying to hold peace talks or offering to hold peace talks, or holding peace talks is taking a position in the war? I dont think we need to inform Switzerland that they have infact never been nutral in any conflict they mediated.

    As for what China wants, they have stated all they want is peace many times, they do not have a horse in the race on who gets what, that makes them the ideal mediators.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (1 child)

    So what is the point of having peace talks if not the cessation of war?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago

    The end goal is the cessation of the war, but the fighting contenues untill a cesefire or peace treaty is negotiated and signed, and the war contenues untill said treaty is signed. A sad truth of war is while diplomats are haggling over words on a page the fighting still contues, the war ends when the negotiations end.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago

    Is this really true though? A neutral third party would not supply weapons or have any economic incentive to the outcome of the conflict, which China plainly does have. I'm not saying the US or really any NATO country is in a better position, however saying China is only interested in peace and are a neutral third party is disingenuous.

    And as to what Blinken is saying, that's something Ukraine has been saying since the invasion began. Sure it's not his place, however if you interpret it charitably, it could also be construed as supporting the stance of your ally in the face of pressure towards an agreement they don't really want.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago (2 children)

    From what I understand, that's the idea. They are just affirming the Ukrainian position and are saying hey, we won't withhold support and force you into a peace agreement where Ukraine would concede land to Russia despite not wanting to

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 3 years ago (1 child)

    Except that isnt what was said what was said is that the United States will reject any peace treaty that does not include total Russian withdrawal, they are not just giving support in general, or to a point in particular, but dictating a term. This is a conflict that offically the US is not a party to and as such the US should not be making statements like this. Agian in my opinion it should not go farther than "The United States supports Ukraine in their efforrs for peace, and for all reasonable terms they put forward" if they go farther and they wanted to show it in support it would have been "As stated before, The United States suports the Ukrainian position, including the one mentioned by [offical X] on [Day y] that any peace would include total Russian withdrawl" given nither happened, it can only be taken as the US dictating terms for a thing that they have no buisness or right setting terms for

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 3 years ago

    Actually that's basically what it says in the first paragraph

    the United States and its allies should not support a cease-fire or peace talks to end the war in Ukraine until Kyiv gains strength and can negotiate on its own terms

    Basically saying Ukraine won't be pressured to accept a peace deal until they're in a stronger position

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent