The Washington Post reports today on Donald Trump's "secret" plan to end the Ukraine war:
Trump’s proposal consists of pushing Ukraine to cede Crimea and the Donbas border region to Russia.... That approach, which has not been previously reported, would dramatically reverse President Biden’s policy, which has emphasized curtailing Russian aggression and providing military aid to Ukraine.
So the plan is: Give Russia everything it wants. Helluva plan there.
And this guy is the leader of the Republican Party? The party that routinely accuses Democrats of being weak on foreign policy? The party that endlessly claimed Barack Obama was abandoning our friends and kowtowing to our enemies? That Republican Party?
Yep. That's the one.
“Plan”…. My ass…. SMDH. WaPo thinks that idiot plans things?!!! Don’t they remember the ACA replacement that never arrived? Or Infrastructure Week?!
The former president commented that Norman Chamberlane was the greatest president in English history, whose deal at Munich saved the Olympics from the terrorists.
It's the Art of the Deal. This was the best deal Trump could get out of Putin. Of corse it's pathetic, that's because Donald is pathetic.
Kenalovell -- Hmmmm ...... I wonder if Trump might be thinking of Neville Chamberlain, the Prime Minister of Great Britain, whose deal in Munich obviously had nothing to do with the Olympics or terrorists, although I guess you could call the Nazis terrorists. But what do I know? Trump must be a history savant.
Add Ukraine to growing list of-
"We got your back . . . until we don't"
"You can trust the government, just ask:
. . . American Indians
. . . Iraqi interpreters
. . . Iranian Nuke Negotaitors
. . . Kurds
Pay attention Taiwan 🙁
That's why Taiwan has made itself a tech keystone of the world economy.
What is "everything that Russia wants"? According to Putin it may be the restoration of the former Russian empire or the USSR (same thing). That has to be stopped. What are Trump's plans for protecting the former "republics"?
But returning the Crimea to Ukraine is not a realistic goal, aside from the fact that Ukraine has no legitimate claim to it anyway. Some kind of stalemate may be the best that can be hoped for, with an armistice as in Korea. On neither side of the debate in the US is reality a primary concern - it's mostly partisan politics, propelled by standard American nationalism, or White Christian nationalism.
Any "armistice" along the lines of Trump's reported "plan" would only be temporary. Zelenskyy would have to go as part of the deal, of course, either going into exile or falling out of a high-rise window. The country would have to be demilitarised. A Moscow-friendly government would have to be installed, followed by a steadily increasing program to "solve the Ukraine problem" by making the struggling rump state a Russian province. Eventually Russian troops would occupy the country to "restore order" in the face of "terrorist atrocities" by "Nazi resistance gangs". And that would be that.
Pretty much the script here, I agree. Any "negotiated end" to the current hostilities can only be a temporary truce as long as the Putinist system exists, with or without Putin himself. No agreement that has Russia claiming to respect boundaries will be worth the toner that fixes it on paper.
Agreed. Which is why about the only plan the Ukrainians could even sort of agree to would include defense guarantees from the US and others including boots on the ground near the new frontier. Which Russia might not agree to, of course.
I would say have the smaller Ukrainian state join NATO, but jeez, we had a bear of a time getting Finland and Swede in. I think the objections would be stronger here and frankly for good reasons in some cases.
The only way this is feasible is if Ukraine joins NATO, not a given if some of the members believe that Russia would try to invade again.
But the reality is, Trump does believe might makes right.
There WAS an argument that transferring Crimea to Ukraine was a USSR internal administrative decision that should have been reversed when the USSR dissolved. However, Russia signed the Budapest memorandum which, among other things, guaranteed Ukraine's borders as they existed when the USSR dissolved, effectively surrendering any claim to Crimea. That should have permanently ended any dispute about Crimea belonging to Ukraine. In short, yes Ukraine DOES have a legitimate claim, the only legitimate claim, to Crimea.
Precisely!
Said much better, and with much more detail, than I would have done when I saw that statement, thank you.
@skeptonomist, we've had this system in principle since the Treaty of Westphalia where sovereign states agree with each other on borders and agree to respect them. Bad things have happened when borders haven't been respected, and the bad things have often been very bad for a very long time for very many people. Since WWII extra effort has gone into trying to stabilize and enforce respect for borders, particularly within Europe. And per multi-party agreement, including Russia, Crimea is part of Ukraine.
I do not want our world to be once again (or continue to be, depending on where you look) a place where any asshole with an army can invade across an agreed boundary, can pillage and destroy the lives of people across that agreed boundary, any time said asshole damn well pleases and on any pretext.
That trump doesn't give a tinker's damn about any of that is one of the many reasons why he belongs in a sandbox in Florida and nowhere near any levers of actual power.
+10 and well stated.
I think the idea of respecting international borders is a post-WW2 thing. The Westphalia system was more about sovereign states as the fundamental units of things. Because there was lots of violation of borders and efforts to take neighboring lands prior to WW2 which did not incur significant opprobrium before the end of WW2.
But I agree with your sentiments otherwise.
Agreed, Europe's experience after 1648 wasn't particularly distinguished by respect for boundaries! But Westphalia is usually seen as inaugurating a system based on legally equal sovereigns, the basis for a system of respecting borders, and I think most of the post-Versailles boundary changes were done with at least a fig leaf of legal procedure. Granted that in many cases (plebiscites, etc) that process invited violence, for the same reason and in just about the same way as Bleeding Kansas here. Just marching armies in after Versailles was more the exception, I think. But I don't know much about adjustments around the former Austria-Hungary.
More than that about half of Ukraine was controlled by Crimea prior to the expansion of the Russian Empire, while the rest was controlled by Poland.
If Russia were the nicest country on the face of the earth, it would have a legitimate great power interest in access to the Black Sea. Forcing Russia out of the Crimea any time soon, no matter how just, is hopeless. I propose that Ukraine and Russia agree to binding arbitration on a fair price that Russia will pay to buy it.
Russia has hundreds of kilometers of Black Sea coast, including the port cities of Novorossiysk, Sochi and Rostov-na-Donu (via the Sea of Azov). Prior to 2014, Russia also leased its naval facilities at Sevastopol from Ukraine, which had agreed to a long-term renewal.
Before the war, the Russian Black Sea Fleet operated freely; now it has lost its flagship and one-third of its numbers, and is at risk everywhere but the farthest eastern part of the sea.
This war is not about any rational national objective of Russia, it’s about Putin’s imperialist ambitions.
Crimea doesn't have the resources to support a population of any significant size, and certainly not military installations like the naval bases there, without continuous supply from outside. Almost all its fresh water, for example, was supplied from the reservoir behind the dam the Russians destroyed. Without the Kerch bridge and naval access they would almost certainly have to abandon it. The Ukrainians have been working hard, and effectively (as KenSchulz points out), at restricting naval access. And the Ukrainians, I think, have no intention of leaving a demonstrated hostile power in a position to block their major export channel at will and without warning. I think Crimea is a more important mid-term objective for them than the Donbas, which will take decades and billions to rehabilitate.
But returning the Crimea to Ukraine is not a realistic goal
Agreed.
aside from the fact that Ukraine has no legitimate claim to it anyway.
Strongly disagree. While the status of Crimea was arguably murky at the time of dissolution of the USSR, once that happened Crimea was, in fact, the territory of that sovereign nation called "Ukraine." Countries aren't allowed under international law to alter borders with force.
Yeah, Crimea was part of the Russian rather than Ukrainian SSR until 1954, when Khrushchev transferred it over to Ukraine, and it generally has had more Russian than Ukrainian speakers.
But since it WAS legally part of Ukraine upon the dissolution of the USSR and the Russians and others signed an agreement in 1994 I think which included Ukraine giving up its nuclear weapons and Russia guaranteeing the Ukraine's territorial integrity, international law is undeniably on Ukraine's side here
"No claim"
...uhh, it was part of the Ukraine since umm, the last hundred years?
Russia has less claim to it, since it was the land of the nomadic Tartars who Russia kicked out when Russia took it in 2014.
Oh, but when he announces it he'll yell self-righteously at us Americans about how strong and respected he'll make us again, and pound his chest a few times, and (try to) strut around a little bit. That's what his people consider "strong," bellowing and strutting.
Neither they nor we see him off-camera pocketing Putin's IOUs. But then trump's people probably would think that's being strong too.
"No, you're the puppet!"
Along those lines:
-Give Kim Jong-un South Korea.
-Give Xi Jinping Taiwan.
-Give Mohammed bin Salman full reign to cut up anyone with a bone saw.
-Give Viktor Orbán pieces of Croatia, Slovakia, and Romania.
I suspect that Orbán would like the whole Austro-Hungarian Empire back.
Orban would take the part of Ukraine west of the Carpathinans.
He would. That's not a flippant comment.
I expect Trump would see no objection to any of those, provided the beneficiaries made it worth his while. He's complained frequently and bitterly about other countries not being willing to pay America for the protection it gives them.
Give Texas, Oklahoma, New Mexico, Arizona, Nevada, California, and a big part of Utah, Colorado, and little bits elsewhere, back to Mexico.
Clearly, the goal of territorial expansion into Ukraine has always been one of Putin's prime reasons for his active coordination with Trump and his minions. This has been the backstory that led to the former president's first impeachment (the "perfect call") and continues on today with the farce of the Hunter Biden allegations, whose only real goal is to damage his father's reelection chances.
Of course, a successful, if costly, expansion into Donbas and Crimea would only encourage Putin to continue taking other areas, in both Ukraine and beyond. He has made these intentions well known.
I don’t really think one can trust Putin with any agreement. That said, I would guess and it just a guess, that both sides would like a ceasefire at this time. I ceasefire would mean the current militarized lines hold. From there, the areas subject to Russian occupation should be given a choice through an international sponsored referendum. Anyways, that’s as far as anything could go now.
I don’t see any evidence that Ukraine wants a ceasefire. They still blowing up ships and oil refineries in Russia.
I don’t believe Russia wants a ceasefire and it won’t accept one until Trump loses the election. If Trump wins the election or is otherwise anointed President he will help them achieve total victory. Because of that they will do everything in their power to help him win like they did last time.
Bingo!
This ^^^^^^^^^^
I notice that the article talks about “pressuring” Ukraine but doesn’t mention what that means. It also doesn’t indicate any type of “pressure” on Russia.
The truth is that Trump will demand Ukraine to surrender on the best terms that Russia will allow. And if they don’t he will tell Russia to do whatever the hell they want.
"Best terms that Russia will allow" if there's a trump presidency = Crimea, Donbas (or maybe all Ukrainian territory east of the Dnipro), disbanding all military forces except minimum needed for internal policing and surrendering all equipment except maybe small crowd-control armor, stopping all military production in Ukraine (facilities maybe to be transferred to Russia), ending all cooperation/coordination with NATO, agreeing that all exports must be handled by Russian firms, guaranteeing free passage for Russian citizens and military to Transnistria, plus political "concessions" in the rump western section, along lines proposed by kenalovell upthread. Modeled roughly on Vichy France, say. Oh, and reparations, of course.
And you're right, if the Ukrainians wouldn't agree to that kind of modest plan he'd give Putin the green light to do whatever the hell he wants.
Good god, can you imagine if Mexico were a nuclear superpower and decided to invade the US southwest, claiming that 19th century treaties like Guadelupe Hidalgo were no longer operative, because reasons and national glory? That's basically what Russia is arguing wrt Donbas and Crimea in Ukraine.
If Mexico wanted to take Texas back, I suspect that many Americans would support them. They might get a bit more resistance if they tried to repossess California.
Oh yeah, and Spain is coming for Florida.
And from the 49th parallel south, the boundary between Canada and the US will be the Columbia River.
In regards to Putin I think Trump is just channeling his inner Teddy Roosevelt, you know, "bellow loudly and carry a teeny weeny stick" .
Pause for a second and consider all those billionaire supporters of Trump. They really don’t like democracy, that’s for certain. What they want is a one party state (fascist in nature), and white privilege. They really don’t care about state religions or the homophobia and legislated misogyny of the evangelicals and other religionists as long as they give their support to a fascist state and stay away from their money. They are Americas 5th column and some are outright traitors…… including maybe the Siberian Candidate. They literally believe that laws don’t appy to them.
This is what has brought me around to favoring a confiscatory wealth tax.
I would only take issue with the word, "confiscatory". If they were actually accountable, they should pay for the government they use.
Perhaps Il Duce will sign this agreement in Munich, and then proclaim "peace for our time". His continued subservience to Putin makes me think the "pissy" tapes, or worse, are probably real.
What a fucking moron, and the bigger morons are whoever supports or votes for him.
Those tapes, an interesting question. Personally, I don't think they need to be real for Putin to have reduced trump to crawling and cowering like a whipped cur around him. Putin was trained at finding any kinds of vulnerabilities in people and leveraging them into making people do what he wants. For somebody like that, trump must be an unbelievable playground of opportunities-- so studded with deep-seated emotional and financial manipulation points that he might have had a hard time deciding where to start.
Just think of somebody like trump getting short, cryptic messages and phone calls at totally arbitrary times that question his sanity and manliness, from somebody he depends on for money and to help hide his secret unworthiness. He'd be jelly. Kind of Fred's role, come to think of it . . . But you get the point.
And also a moron, agreed.
Well..... not everything.... He didn't openly ask Ukraine to simply surrender itsef entirely and reintegrate into the Russian Empire.
But a very Sudentenland solution.
First the Sudentenland, then all of Czechoslovokia. First the Donbas and Crimea, then all of Ukraine, Belarus, the Baltic countries, and Poland.
In part, because Republicans are attempting to cut off Ukraine, the asymmetrical warfare is expanding.
This year, Ukraine will produce over a million drones of various capabilities on top of the promise of coalition partners to deliver another million drones.
Instead of ending the war, Republicans are actually prolonging it.
You're either "weak on foreign policy" or "a bloodthirsty warmonger who will send your kids to be slaughtered", depending on the needs of whatever day it is.
Wow! That was the Katrina van den Heuvel plan, literally from Day one of Russia's invasion! "We lied to them and expanded NATO, so they're entitled!" -- which we now know to be Russian propaganda.
"Give Russia all it wants"??? I don't think so. The Russian parliament formally annexed Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts, neither of which are in Crimea or part of the Donbas (Donetsk and Luhansk oblasts). This was a brazen move, especially since Russia did not at the time, nor even now, control all of Zaporizhzhia or Kherson.
The presumed Trump "plan" would force Russia to withdraw all forces from Zaporizhzhia and Kherson oblasts, including Mariupol. I actually think that this would be a favorable outcome for Ukraine. However, it would have to include NATO membership for Ukraine. That is the only outcome that has a reasonable chance of securing Ukraine's independence and freedom from yet another Russian invasion.
Just a little slice of Poland.