Quando un accordo di pace premia l’aggressore, la giustizia muore
https://ukraineworld.org/en/articles/analysis/when-peace-agreement-rewards-aggressor-justice-dies
di dat_9600gt_user
Quando un accordo di pace premia l’aggressore, la giustizia muore
https://ukraineworld.org/en/articles/analysis/when-peace-agreement-rewards-aggressor-justice-dies
di dat_9600gt_user
18 commenti
This is not peace, but terms of surrender
>Peace proposals unaccompanied by a sworn covenant indicate a plot.
– Sun Tzu
This is not a ‘peace’ agreement – it is a piece-by-piece agreement for a fascist appeasement, opening the door to more violent imperialist invasion/annexations.
Justice died in the US the moment Trump wasn’t convicted of his crimes.
Peace is bare minimum all Russian military and mercenary forces are removed from Ukraine or disarmed and imprisoned, and Ukraine joins NATO. Unless the Russian state collapses and all their nukes are decommissioned by the international community, then NATO membership isn’t as much of a factor.
Ukraine lost the war. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional. All that is debated now is how much of a loss was it.
Any slim chance of a come back, if we only give them more weapons, or if we only put a few more thousand sanctions on Russia vanished long ago. The Kursk operation was make or break, Ukraine dedicated A LOT of good manpower and equipment into it, even caught Russia off guard, yet they didn’t do much there and lost it. Their position deteriorates daily across the entire front. The Russian military industry complex is more productive now than before the war, they make A LOT of drones domestically now and are constantly ramping up production. There is no light at the end of this tunnel.
Unless Europe gets involved directly with a couple hundred thousand strong military force straight to the front lines
When everyone stands by and offers “helmets” to stop a dictator, the dictator wins.
Justice doesn’t exist in war
Just like 1938
That’s called an armistice
The entire world order which garanteed peace for most people of the planet is based on the idea of never allowing the agressor to take territory
Justice dies among many other good things
Peace dies. Stability dies.
More war victims die. Aggressors live.
The world getting a hard lesson in real Politik and the difference between things as we wish them to be and how they are. Violence/force or the credible threat thereof has always been the basis of international relations (and governance for that matter).
If you are unable or unwilling to do violence, you’re relegated to the position of writing strongly worded letters, condemning things publicly, and complaining loudly… often with little to show for it.
From a practical standpoint, we would have to settle for a peace deal sooner or later, but it’s conditions that matter and those can only be dictated by the reality on the ground. So far, our strategy has been to put russia through a meat grinder until they either tear themselves apart from the political unrest or will run out of money necessary to sustain their economy. It’s hard to tell whether it’s working or not because russia definitely lies about their economic state and economies can look relatively functional until they suddenly collapse. We would have to wait and see for as long as we can reasonably afford it. In that regard, slow territorial conquests don’t matter much because the front can collapse from their side if their internal structures keeping it afloat do.
But that’s a rather optimistic scenario that presumes we will have enough people and weapons to maintain our own front. In reality, we probably wouldn’t, so the more realistic approach is the Winter War scenario where we surrender some territory over security guarantees after we’ve drained the enemy sufficiently. That’s not a victory by any means, but it’s not a loss either, because russia’s primary objective of overthrowing the government and installing a puppet regime has failed either way. As long as we maintain our independence, the question is, what can we afford to lose?
A peace project without guarantees of deterring Russia is not about peace, but about a pause.
As reported by [Axios](https://www.axios.com/2025/04/22/trump-russia-ukraine-peace-plan-crimea-donbas), last week, in Paris, the United States presented Ukrainian officials with a one-page document – a draft of the peace agreement. It does not provide for **any obligations for Russia** to end the war and not to start a new one, but it does set out **a number of requirements for Ukraine,** a country that did not initiate the war. This jeopardises not only justice but also the very possibility of sustainable peace.
**What is being offered to Ukraine, and why it is unacceptable**
The proposed plan provides for “mutual concessions” – in fact, the transfer of part of Ukrainian territories under Russian control. Among the conditions are:
* official recognition of **Crimea** as part of the Russian Federation,
* **rejection of NATO** membership,
* withdrawal of Russian troops **only from part of the Kharkiv Oblast**,
* **lifting or reducing sanctions** imposed after 2014.
* recognition of **Russia’s occupation** of almost all of Luhansk Oblast and the occupied portions of Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia Oblasts.
Additionally, it is about establishing US control over the**Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant**, which is supposed to provide electricity to both Ukraine and Russia.
**Why “peace” without guarantees is no peace at all**
The key issue is that the plan contains **no guarantees that Russia will not resume its invasion**. Not a single clause prohibits a new war. And no accountability for the aggressor.
An agreement where the aggressor does not commit to ending the war forever, bears no responsibility for the invasion and does not lose the ability to attack again, is not peace, but **only a pause until the next attack.**
It allows recognising Russia’s right to dictate borders and depriving Ukraine of real protection.
**Violation of the principles of the Budapest Memorandum**
In 1994, Ukraine **voluntarily gave up the world’s third-largest nuclear arsena**l in exchange for security guarantees. According to the Budapest Memorandum, signed by the United States, the United Kingdom, and Russia, Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity were to be inviolable.
**Russia violated the Budapest Memorandum** when it annexed Crimea from Ukraine in 2014.
On brand.
The USA has been captured by the Kremlin. The nations of Europe that still value democracy and freedom must rise up and defend Ukraine, kick out Russia and embrace their role as the leaders of the free world.
America will hopefully swing back in 4 years, but we’ve now tragically proven that our support won’t always be reliable. All future plans need to be made to without the assumption of American support.
The USA conditions are horrible for Ukraine and provide no guarantee of peace. We can all agree to that.
What is the solution?
The USA obviously will block Ukraine from joint NATO as long as the USA is a member. Then everybody will say the USA blocked Ukraine from joining NATO.
Again what is the solution?
The only path forward I see is the EU support Ukraine and form a EU defense organization that allows Ukraine membership.
Will the leaders of the EU do this? Honestly no.
I ask again what is the solution? 😞
Just continuing to blame Trump and the USA is not much of a solution. At some point we must move away from the USA.