this post was submitted on 15 Jan 2025
78 points (91.5% liked)

World News

40268 readers
3897 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Summary

Advisers to Donald Trump acknowledge that resolving the Ukraine war could take months, contradicting Trump's campaign pledge of a "Day One" peace deal.

Trump's incoming envoy, Keith Kellogg, suggested a 100-day target, but analysts consider even that timeline overly optimistic.

Russia has shown limited interest in proposed peace plans, and Trump's team is contemplating freezing battle lines and offering Ukraine security guarantees.

Progress has been slow, hampered by diplomatic complexities and legal concerns, such as Kellogg postponing a pre-inauguration Kyiv visit due to the Logan Act.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net 7 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

I think a lot of people might not realize how strategically constrained international relations are. There are only so many possible solutions to this conflict and Trump’s incompetence or malevolence can only interfere to a certain extent. Especially when others within the government who are negotiating this deal have real interests in protecting Ukraine.

That said, I think the most likely outcome is no deal but we’ll see.

[–] DicJacobus@lemmy.world 6 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

I've been following this conflict since the very beginning Euromaidan

I have been saying for the last couple years. there is frankly only one scenario where the fighting stops, peace holds, and violence doesn't escalate somewhere else in Eurasia because of it.

September 2022 was the point of no return, any prospect of Russia taking an offramp and everyone going back to a bitter status quo ante-bellum was closed forever by the end of the month. during that month we saw the formal annexation of 4 oblasts. and we also saw the Russians suffer a major defeat and their professional army was in full retreat in the north. They had the opportunity to call it a day, instead on the 22nd, they started a mobilization. that was the end. Now, after that point, the conflict only ends for good in one way

Ukraine joins NATO, Ukraine surrenders the occupied territory formally. Everyone is mad, everyone gets something they want. This is the only scenario I see that will work, and its a bitter one Dont get me wrong, I'm a self admitted psycho who would be perfectly fine with the collapse, balkanization and occupation of the russian federation, but it isnt going to happen, the US is terrified of the prospect of having to deal with the russian nuclear arsenal being fought over,

all other scenarios are as follows.

Fighting continues with no end in sight. Until either

**A1 - Russia collapses internally, and then the world has to deal with Russian civil war, *a catastrophic scenario, and the leading reason NATO never went whole-hog on Ukraine support.. Result - Further, even worse violence in the east. Probable nuclear exchange as ultranationalist blood drunk Russian factions fight each other, and foreign intervention forces

A2 - Ukraine falls, Ukraine turns into a european afghanistan as "The hard part" begins, an insurgency more heavily armed than most standing armies. An apocalyptic humanitarian and refugee crisis. And honestly, Shooting probably starts between Russia and Europe. whether it be Europe Intervenes, or Russia decides to push further. Result - Further, even worse violence in the west. Probable nuclear exchange as WW3 starts in earnest** We're already in WW3, btw

B Or a "ceasefire" is signed, without any concrete assurances to Ukraine, in which case, many western countries use it as an excuse to finally decouple from the country, and in 5-10 years, Russia attacks again, as Russian treaties are only good for wiping your ass, and we're right back into A1 or A2. The fighting goes until the Russians collapse, or the Ukrainian state falls.

Ukraine doesn't have the strength to dislodge russia from the donbass anymore, or crimea, and even if they did, the area is effectively colonized, anyone who was loyal to ukraine was murdered or evicted. now whats left of the donbass is just a depopulated shadow where a bunch of pragmatists, traitors, and new arrivals moving from russia setting up shop are. the people who live there mostly hate the Ukrainian government, and the Ukrainian people hate the people who live there. It's largely acknowledged by the people of both sides that they can never be together again. regardless of what politicians in Kyiv, Moscow, Brussels or DC say.

The only way they'd be forced out is by NATO participation, and just go back to one of the scenarios that results in direct conflict.