#zaporizhzhia history | Explore Tumblr posts and blogs

mariacallous · 9 months ago

Text

Anyone who wants to understand Russian history should ignore Russian President Vladimir Putin. But anyone who wants to understand Putin’s strategic aims should pay close attention to his reading of history. The Russian president’s long lectures and essays on Kyivan Rus and World War II are not random tangents but rather the centerpieces driving his regime’s aggression against Ukraine. The Kremlin’s efforts to impose its reading of history on Ukrainians living under occupation reveal the driving motives of this war, as well as its continued objectives.

Against the backdrop of the uncounted—and uncountable—civilian deaths, mass deportations, and domicide across the occupied territories of Ukraine, it might seem trivial to focus on historical memory. But while it is difficult to take one’s eyes off the satellite images of mass graves in Mariupol, if we fail to grasp the broader grammar of Russia’s war against Ukraine, then we will also fail to recognize the broader ambition of Russia’s war efforts: the deliberate annihilation of Ukrainian identity.

Russia’s strategic deployment of historical propaganda in occupied Ukraine involves a comprehensive effort to “Russify” the local populace, leveraging educational, cultural, and military instruments to erase narratives of Ukrainian history and culture.

Those who resist this erasure are themselves destroyed, often physically. In all of the occupied territories, Russian forces arrived with a list of reportedly patriotic individuals to be captured; tortured; and, if they did not break, executed. From the very beginning, as Putin made clear in a June 2021 essay titled “On the Historical Unity of Russians and Ukrainians,” Russia’s full-scale invasion was intended as a genocidal war.

Genocide aims at the annihilation of the identity and existence of a specific group—in this case, Ukrainians. The crucial aspect of identifying genocide is the intent behind these actions, which distinguishes it from other forms of violence. Evidence of the Kremlin’s destructive intent is overwhelming. And it is overwhelmingly delivered in the language of history.

Upon taking control of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions in 2022, Russia launched an aggressive cultural propaganda campaign characterized by the declaration of annexation anniversaries as national holidays, the standardization of cultural practices to align with Russian norms, the establishment of historical propaganda museums, and the re-Sovietization of street names and monuments. These endeavors were aimed at rapidly embedding the occupied territories within the broader Russian cultural and legal fabric, a strategy reminiscent of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and unlike the more fragmented methods employed in the so-called Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine after 2014.

In regions where local resistance is more robust, such as Melitopol and Berdyansk, there is an intensified effort toward cultural and educational Russification. The formation of militarized youth groups—including the Yunarmiya (Young Army), a military-patriotic movement for children and youth initiated by Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu in 2016, and Eaglets of Russia—is widespread, but the scale and visibility of such programs vary in accordance with the strategic military value of each region to Russia. The nature and intensity of the propaganda varies as well, with a pronounced emphasis on Soviet-era narratives in Donetsk and Luhansk, which were likely deliberately crafted to align with the region’s recent historical narratives and multicultural identities.

While the techniques to suppress Ukrainian identity may adapt, the core objectives of Russian informational campaigns are constant. These efforts relentlessly accentuate the regions’ shared historical and cultural roots with Russia, praising Soviet accomplishments and East Slavic heritage.

The Kremlin’s agenda aims to replace Ukrainian identity with something different—something localized—that can then be subsumed into a broader pan-Russian narrative. To do so, it uses culture and education as weapons of war. This strategy includes mobile libraries, guarded by armed militias, that distribute Russian books and educational resources while destroying Ukrainian books.

Amid this evident historical manipulation and cultural destruction, Russian propaganda distributed in the occupied territories positions the Kremlin as a protector of historical truth, using this stance to propagate narratives conducive to its political and ideological ends. It paints Western and Ukrainian histories as distortions that were deliberately aimed at destroying Russian identity—which the Kremlin argues is the true identity of Ukrainians.

The Khersonshchyna cultural project in the occupied Kherson region, for example, claims to expose Ukrainian history as a series of lies and promotes militaristic Russian myths with the aim of “restoring historical justice” and “curbing the spread of lies.”

Through the adoption of Russian curricular materials, educators, and syllabi prioritizing Russian over Ukrainian heritage, occupation authorities seek to transform residents’ identities, downplaying Ukrainian heritage in favor of a Russian outlook. Russian academics have created an Orwellian 98-page glossary of new correct cultural, historical and social terminology to be enforced in Ukrainian schools on the occupied territories. In the Donbas, organizations such as the Russian Center have produced pseudo-historical doctrines to justify Russia’s occupation. The center, which is funded by the Russian World Foundation, has held a number of festivals centered around the idea that the Donbas is Russia and that Russian culture is inherent to the Donbas.

A common thread in the historical propaganda is the idea that an injustice (Russia’s separation from the lands of what it calls the Donbas and Novorossiya—meaning “New Russia”) has been resolved by the invasion. In September 2023, on the anniversary of the pseudo-referendums held in four newly occupied territories in eastern Ukraine, schools in the Zaporizhzhia region held events to celebrate “reunification with the Russian Federation,” which was referred to as a “restoration of historical justice.” In his state of the nation speech in February 2023, Putin declared the “revival” of the cultural sphere in the occupied territories to be a priority for reestablishing peace. He emphasized the importance of restoring cultural objects to forge a connection across time, asserting that this effort would integrate the local population into the “centuries-old and great Russia.”

In addition to promoting claims of historical restoration and Russian greatness, the occupying forces are systematically undermining Ukraine’s historical legacy. Their strategies extend beyond suppression to the outright destruction and appropriation of Ukrainian heritage. In 2022, the Russian government introduced legislation to legitimize the seizure of items related to Ukrainian cultural heritage. This law permits the inclusion of historical artifacts from occupied regions in the Russian Federation’s registry, effectively erasing their Ukrainian provenance.

The scope of this cultural plunder is vast, with the Ukrainian government reporting that more than 15,000 artifacts have been removed from Kherson alone. Other significant looting pertains to Scythian gold dating back to the 4th century B.C., which was stolen from the Melitopol Museum of Local Lore. That museum and the A. I. Kuindzhi Art Museum were also stripped of their valuable collections. A so-called Ministry of Culture of the Kherson Region has facilitated what the Russian occupiers term the “evacuation” of these items to the Crimean city of Sevastopol, disguising acts of looting as preservation. Their actions and justifications draw obvious parallels with previous examples of imperial looting, such as the British plunder of African artifacts, also carried out under the guise of “evacuation.” Ukrainian archives have also been targeted, with significant portions of the holdings at the regional State Archive of Kherson confiscated.

At least 14 memorials commemorating the victims of the Holodomor—a devastating famine lasting from 1932-33 that was induced by Soviet policies and used to pacify Ukrainian national identity—were dismantled in the communities of Oleshky and Ivanivka in Kherson Oblast. The destruction of these monuments is a further illustration of the erasure of Ukrainian history, especially given that this particular historical episode reveals an ongoing pattern of genocide.

The first deputy chairman of the Kherson Regional Council confirmed these reports, but the occupation administration dismissed the memorials as “tools of manipulation” that were fostering hatred toward Russia.

As they obliterate Ukrainian historical memory, Russian forces are actively reinstalling Soviet-era monuments which were previously removed in Ukraine’s decommunization efforts, especially statues of Lenin. In so doing, the Kremlin is trying to restore a (mis)imagined past of Soviet-Russian greatness and ownership over Ukraine. It is a past that nobody asked them to bring back, but one that will have grave consequences for Russia and Ukraine’s future, given that the indoctrination efforts are most targeted at children.

When Izyum came under occupation in 2022, the establishment of children’s education and cultural centers was prioritized, and such institutions were up and running within weeks. Leveraging educational reforms, patriotic education, and youth organizations, the occupation authorities worked quickly and efficiently to instill a sense of Russian identity among young Ukrainians.

These actions are not only aimed at reshaping the cultural landscape, but also at securing future generations’ allegiance to Russia, often with a clearly militarized agenda, as seen in educational initiatives such as the “Lessons of Courage,” special classes held as part of the school curriculum that glorify the military achievements of the Soviet Union and Russia. These programs include interactions with Russian veterans and encourage expressions of support for current soldiers, further integrating military values into the educational experience.

The establishment of cadet schools in the occupied territories, facilitated through agreements with Russian educational and military authorities, has formalized the militarization of youth, preparing them for possible involvement in future conflicts.

Patriotic education extends beyond the classroom and into extracurricular youth movements and thematic events. Since 2022, in the occupied territories of southern Ukraine, branches of national Russian youth organizations such as Yunarmiya have been established alongside regional military patriotic movements such as the Youth of the South.

Participants receive professional military training, supported by veterans of the Russian Armed Forces and members of the military veterans’ organization Combat Brotherhood. The training includes instruction in weaponry and military tactics. Upon completion, Yunarmiya members are often recruited into the Russian military. According to Andrey Orlov, the exiled Ukrainian director of the Center for Strategic Development of Territories, enrollment in this organization is compulsory in the temporarily occupied territories, with special services personnel frequently visiting educational institutions to engage children in military-themed games. The so-called Warrior Club in occupied Zaporizhzhia, which focuses on military indoctrination and preparation for young men nearing conscription age, highlights the extent of Russia’s commitment to this cause.

There is a grisly strategy behind Russia’s militaristic engagement with children in the occupied territories: to indoctrinate them into forsaking their national identity and to groom them to die for their new supposed motherland.

Despite Moscow’s extensive indoctrination efforts, there has been resistance. Officials from the temporarily occupied Luhansk region have reported recruitment difficulties to the Kremlin, noting a significant shortage of teachers in Russian language, literature, and history.

As Ukrainian teachers refuse to teach these subjects, educators are brought in from Russia, often housed in apartments confiscated from local residents. This considerable influx of Russian educators tasked with instilling a Russian-centric curriculum should also be seen as part of Russian demographic engineering efforts, deporting Ukrainians to Siberia and further, while bringing in Russian citizens to take their place.

Still, in the face of penalties and home raids, a notable segment of the population steadfastly refuses to enroll their children in Russian-administered schools, instead opting for home-schooling. The rejection of Russian educational mandates underscores the enduring spirit of Ukrainian identity and a widespread collective desire to preserve national consciousness. This resilience is also demonstrated by the hundreds of students who, despite the risks of retaliation, use VPNs to pursue their studies with Ukrainian universities and schools online, sustaining vital community ties.

Moreover, Ukrainians are countering attempts to expunge their cultural memory. Last November, residents in occupied areas followed the Ukrainian tradition of lighting candles in their windows to commemorate the Holodomor. Despite the perils, with Russian forces actively dismantling Holodomor memorials, many courageously shared images of these acts of remembrance via Telegram, in commitment to their history and identity.

The Kremlin’s Russification, historical falsification, youth indoctrination, militarization, and cultural manipulation reveal Russia’s true agenda. In keeping with Putin’s rhetoric since 2022, it is clear that Russia’s ongoing war on Ukraine is aimed not only at territorial control, but also at the eradication of Ukrainian national identity.

Faced with conquerors that view their national existence as a threat, the cultural resistance of Ukrainians in the occupied territories is not only a refusal to submit to Kremlin propaganda—it is an essential part of Ukraine’s survival.

57 notes · View notes

kobzars · 9 months ago

Text

The shelling of the DniproHES in Zaporizhzhia by Russian troops took place on the night of March 22, 2024. The plant stopped working after the shelling.

A book about the history of the construction of this station "To Dniprelstan", 1930

#DniproHES #Zaporizhzhia #Ukraine #Kobzar Library #book #antique books #rare books #book review #books #о книгах #культурний простір кобзар

50 notes · View notes

ukrainenews · 2 years ago

Text

The wall of a major dam in southern Ukraine collapsed Tuesday, triggering floods, endangering Europe’s largest nuclear power plant and threatening drinking water supplies as both sides in the war rushed to evacuate residents and blamed each other for the destruction.

Ukraine accused Russian forces of blowing up the Kakhovka dam and hydroelectric power station on the Dnieper River in an area that Moscow controls, while Russian officials blamed Ukrainian bombardment in the contested area. It was not possible to verify the claims.

The potentially far-reaching environmental and social consequences of the disaster quickly became clear as homes, streets and businesses flooded downstream and emergency crews began evacuations; officials raced to check cooling systems at the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant; and authorities expressed concern about supplies of drinking water to the south in Crimea, which Russia illegally annexed in 2014.

Both Russian and Ukrainian authorities brought in trains and buses for residents. About 22,000 people live in areas at risk of flooding in Russian-controlled areas, while 16,000 live in the most critical zone in Ukrainian-held territory, according to official tallies. Neither side reported any deaths or injuries.

The dam break added a stunning new dimension to Russia’s war in Ukraine, now in its 16th month. Ukrainian forces were widely seen to be moving forward with a long-anticipated counteroffensive in patches along more than 1,000 kilometers (621 miles) of front line in the east and south.

It was not immediately clear whether either side benefits from the damage to the dam, since both Russian-controlled and Ukrainian-held lands are at risk. The damage could also hinder Ukraine’s counteroffensive in the south and distract its government, while Russia depends on the dam to supply water to Crimea.

Patricia Lewis, director of the International Security Program at Chatham House think tank in London, said apportioning blame is difficult but “there are all sorts of reasons why Russia would do this.”

“There were reports (last fall) of Russians having mined the reservoir. The question we should pose is why the Ukrainians would do this to themselves, given this is Ukrainian territory,” she said.

Experts have previously said the dam was suffering from disrepair. David Helms, a retired American scientist who has monitored the reservoir since the start of the war, said in an e-mail that it wasn’t clear if the damage was deliberate or simple neglect from Russian forces occupying the facility.

But Helms reserved judgement, also noting a Russian history of attacking dams.

Authorities, experts and residents have expressed concern for months about water flows through — and over — the Kakhovka dam. After heavy rains and snow melt last month, water levels rose beyond normal levels, flooding nearby villages. Satellite images showed water washing over damaged sluice gates.

Amid official outrage, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he convened an urgent meeting of the National Security Council. He alleged Russian forces set off a blast inside the dam structure at 2:50 a.m. (2350 GMT Monday) and said about 80 settlements were in danger. Zelenskyy said in October his government had information that Russia had mined the dam and power plant.

But Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called it “a deliberate act of sabotage by the Ukrainian side … aimed at cutting water supplies to Crimea.”

Both sides warned of a looming environmental disaster. Ukraine’s Presidential Office said some 150 metric tons of oil escaped from the dam machinery and that another 300 metric tons could still leak out.

Andriy Yermak, the head of Ukraine’s President’s Office, posted a video showing swans swimming near an administrative building in the flooded streets of Russian-occupied Nova Kakhovka, a city in the Kherson region where some 45,000 people lived before the war. Other footage he posted showed flood waters reaching the second floor of the building.

Ukraine’s Interior Ministry urged residents of 10 villages on the Dnieper’s right bank and parts of the city of Kherson downriver to gather essential documents and pets, turn off appliances, and leave, while cautioning against possible disinformation.

The Russian-installed mayor of occupied Nova Kakhovka, Vladimir Leontyev, said it was being evacuated as water poured into the city.

Ukraine’s nuclear operator Energoatom said in a Telegram statement that the damage to the dam “could have negative consequences” for the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant, which is Europe’s biggest, but wrote that for now the situation is “controllable.”

The U.N.’s International Atomic Energy Agency said in a statement there was “no immediate risk to the safety of the plant,” which requires water for its cooling system.

It said that IAEA staff on site have been told the dam level is falling by 5 centimeters (2 inches) an hour. At that rate, the supply from the reservoir should last a few days, it said.

The plant also has alternative sources of water, including a large cooling pond than can provide water “for some months,” the statement said.

Ukrainian authorities have previously warned that the dam’s failure could unleash 18 million cubic meters (4.8 billion gallons) of water and flood Kherson and dozens of other areas where thousands of people live.

The World Data Center for Geoinformatics and Sustainable Development, a Ukrainian nongovernmental organization, estimated that nearly 100 villages and towns would be flooded. It also reckoned that the water level would start dropping only after five-seven days.

A total collapse in the dam would wash away much of the broad river’s left bank, according to the Ukraine War Environmental Consequences Working Group, an organization of environmental activists and experts documenting the war’s environmental effects.

Mykhailo Podolyak, a senior adviser to President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, said that “a global ecological disaster is playing out now, online, and thousands of animals and ecosystems will be destroyed in the next few hours.”

Video posted online showed floodwaters inundating a long roadway; another showed a beaver scurrying for high ground from rising waters.

The incident also drew international condemnation, including from German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg, who said the “outrageous act … demonstrates once again the brutality of Russia’s war in Ukraine.”

Ukraine controls five of the six dams along the Dnieper, which runs from its northern border with Belarus down to the Black Sea and is crucial for the country’s drinking water and power supply.

Ukraine’s state hydro power generating company wrote in a statement that “The station cannot be restored.” Ukrhydroenergo also claimed Russia blew up the station from inside the engine room.

Leontyev, the Russian-appointed mayor, said numerous Ukrainian strikes on the Kakhovka hydroelectric plant destroyed its valves, and “water from the Kakhovka reservoir began to uncontrollably flow downstream.” Leontyev added that damage to the station was beyond repair, and it would have to be rebuilt.

Ukraine and Russia have previously accused each other of targeting the dam with attacks.

#ukraine #war in ukraine #russia #kakhovka dam #nova kakhovka #zaporizhzhia nuclear plant #crimea

58 notes · View notes

mirrorhunt · 1 year ago

Text

I remember when I was so annoyed before the invasion that no one knew about Orikhiv. Not even in Zaporizhzhia. And we were the first city in the history of Zaporizhzhia oblast. Our history ran deep, we had so many historical buildings, so many stories that were passed from family to family. Once our town was rich and popular, everyone knew its name. Then, we became smaller and smaller, because there were little workplaces, so young people moved on. It's also due to negligence of authority, who didn't fight for us when we needed them too, so we made ruckus, but no one noticed. No media attention. It made me mad at times. Why our neighborhing towns and cities were prospering, but not us? Why they lived better, but not us? Then it began to change. We gained our own activists, who started asking those uncomfortable questions, and they were answered. Slowly, step by step, our town was improving.

Then, the fullscale war happened. Those towns and cities around us? Under the occupation. Or are getting shelled, less then we are, but still.

But now, suddenly, people know our name. Because we hosted refugees. Because we were the last line of defense on russian way to Zaporizhzhia. They named us "sturdy nut" literally, because Orikhiv means walnut. In other words, "backbreaker". They couldn't occupy us, so they slowly grind us to dust.

But now everyone knows about us in Ukraine at least. We are the lower scale Bakhmut. But I never wanted this fame, obviously. Be careful what you wish for, indeed.

Better we were still another unknown town near Zaporizhzhia, with a long history and dwindling population, then any of this. Better I still lived peacefully in my home, bitching about the heat, then writing about my poor Orikhiv from far far away.

#war in ukraine #orikhiv

44 notes · View notes

1991-ukraina-instagram-updates · 6 months ago

Text

checked quotev, so mass update:

Update of the past week

•Today Russia launched mass attacks across Ukraine killing at least 41 and injuring over 170 (many still under rubble), children and animals died as well; Russia targeted Ukraine's largest children's hospital and a maternity hospital

•Ukrainian forces withdraw from eastern Chasiv Yar neighborhood

•Russia’s and China’s relations at ‘best in history’; Xi indicated his support for Russia in it’s full-scale invasion of Ukraine

•97% of Russian missiles, drones, and bombs hit civilian infrastructure (with only 3% hitting military targets)

•120,000 Russian occupiers killed in Ukraine -Meduza, Mediazona

•34% of Russians believe a nuclear strike against Ukraine would be justified

•14 Ukrainian brigades lack supplies as aid arrives slowly

•Yesterday 33 were killed as a result of Russia’s attack on Ukraine’s largest children’s hospital, maternity hospital, and other civilian structures. 32,000 people (2,200 children) sought refuge in metro stations in Kyiv

Day 867

•45 killed (including children), over 200 injured (including children) in Russian attacks against Ukraine (figures include yesterday’s attacks as well)

•US obtained intelligence on possible Russian-linked sabotage plots in Europe

•Ukraine will be represented at the Olympics by the smallest number of athletes ever 140) as sports facilities and training is interrupted by Russian missiles and air raids

•Ukrainian forces attacked Russian airbase, oil depot, and Russia’s energy facility overnight

Day 868

•8 killed, 24 injured in Russian attacks against Ukraine

•Ukrainians raised nearly $7M in 1 day to restore Kyiv children’s hospital after Russia destroyed it

•During US elections, Russia aims to undermine support for Ukraine

•Ukraine can use British Storm Shadow missiles to hit targets in Russia for defense purposes

•Russia lacks the troops and ammunition for a major offensive in Ukraine - NATO official

Day 869

•5 killed, 14 injured in Russian attacks against Ukraine

•Thousands of Ukrainians living in Poland have voluntarily joined a Ukrainian Legion being trained in Poland

•Ukrainian forces halted Russian advance to Borova village, Kharkiv oblast;

•Indian state refiners discuss long-term oil import deal with Russia

•US and Germany stopped Russian plot to assassinate CEO of weapons manufacturer

personal update from her:

Just to let everyone know, I’ll be in Ukraine until the 25th of July, (bringing over humanitarian aid, visiting friends, etc) that will cause the times I post to be significantly earlier and likely shorter (as it’s earlier in the day, not all updates for the day will be in yet). There are only a few hours of electricity a day but I will do my best to keep posting if able. Please continue supporting Ukraine through staying informed, reposting, donating if able (u24.gov.ua/), and your prayers are very much appreciated. Stay healthy, stay safe, and God bless everyone

-Ukraina

Day 870

•7 killed, 46 injured (children) in Russian attacks against Ukraine

•Russian pilot (shocked by Russia’s attack on Kyiv children’s hospital) leaked confidential data on Russian aviation division to Ukraine

•Russia plans to block YouTube this fall -Russian media

•Chinese and Belarusian militaries conduct joint drills near NATO and Ukraine borders

•GPS jamming in Finland likely part of Russian hybrid campaign -ISW

•UN demands Russia withdraw from occupied Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant

Day 871

•12 killed (chief emergency worker), 34 injured in Russian attacks against Ukraine

•In the past 6 months at least 10,014 Russian soldiers have been killed fighting in Ukraine

•Russian kamikaze attack drone flies deep into Belarus, whereabouts unknown

•National Bank sets new historic low for Ukrainian hryvnia exchange rate ($1 = 41.04hrn)

•Ukrainian drones strike Russian oil depot overnight

Day 872

•15 killed, 75 injured in Russian attacks against Ukraine

•China and Russia begin joint military drills

•Russia falsely accusing Ukraine of involvement in attempted assassination of Donald Trump

•Russia often fails to evacuate injured soldiers, uses them and POWs in human wave attacks

Russian forces are sending injured soldiers back to the front and using Ukrainian prisoners of war (POWs) as shields in "human wave" attacks. -The Telegraph Human wave assaults are frontal attacks launched by infantry units without armored vehicles or other defensive shields. Russia has deployed such attacks in its full-scale war against Ukraine, notably in the battle to capture Avdiivka in Donetsk Oblast -The Kyiv Independent

#ukraine #free ukraine #1991_ukraina instagram updates #(Well… more like quotev)#war updates

3 notes · View notes

sonyaheaneyauthor · 7 months ago

Text

Zaporozhian Cossack Officer. Ukraine, 1720.

#ukrainian history #ukraine #cossacks #18th century art #ukrainian art #zaporizhzhia #18th century #eastern europe #1720s #1720 #painting #art

68 notes · View notes

awesome-casuallyfamouscollector · 2 years ago

Photo

Destroyed Russian KAMAZ 6x6 military truck, Zaporizhzhia region, Ukraine, 2023. Source: ukr.warspotting.net

#Ukraine #russian defeat #KAMAZ #military truck #Zaporizhzhia region #military history #russian invasion #russian imperialism #russian losses #russian attack on europe

14 notes · View notes

dreaminginthedeepsouth · 1 year ago

Text

You have to wonder what it would take to get House and Senate Republicans to get off their collective duffs and walk across their respective cloak rooms to smell the proverbial coffee. City after city after city in Ukraine has been leveled by Russian artillery and rockets. The port of Mariupol is a shell of its former self. Large areas of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city, are in rubble. Bakhmut doesn’t exist anymore. There isn’t a square mile of Ukraine from Kharkiv in the north through Dnipro and Zaporizhzhia, all the way to Kherson on the coast of the Black Sea that hasn’t been severely damaged if not utterly destroyed by Russia’s war of aggression.

Wait. Let’s stop right there. I’ve been writing words like these for nearly two years about the war in Ukraine, and they accurately convey what has happened in the war. So do Ukraine’s numbers of the dead and wounded, both military and civilian. But sitting here in Northeast Pennsylvania, or more to the point, in a limestone and marble building in Washington, D.C., there is no way to adequately conceive of the horror Russia has wrought in the country that stands between it and Europe.

We in the United States don’t have cities that have had to be rebuilt or great expanses of cemeteries in which are buried the civilian dead of wars.

From 1939 to 1945, Nazi Germany wreaked havoc through Europe all the way to the outskirts of Leningrad and Moscow. When I lived in Germany in the 1950’s and took trips with my parents through Germany and France and Italy, you could still see the damage done in World War II. Churches from the 13th and 14th centuries in small towns lay in ruins with maybe a single stone wall still standing. City after city still had not finished cleaning up the rubble from bombings and artillery shelling. I still have images in my mind of old women in long dresses with headscarves stacking bricks along the sides of blown-up streets in Stuttgart as we drove through on our way to visit friends stationed at an army post in Baumholder.

Today, having seen the damage wrought by World War II in Western Europe as a boy, it’s hard for me to transfer those images through 65 years to Ukraine, but there they are: new photographs and videos of similar destruction only a thousand or so miles from the destroyed cities I saw in the 1950s. We founded the United Nations in 1945 and NATO in 1949 in an attempt by nations that gathered together to try to ensure that the horrors the world had just been through did not happen again. There was a hope years ago that we wouldn’t have wars if they could be adequately described and remembered. But here we are, looking at our televisions and phone and computer screens at the tragic images all over again.

All this because one man, Vladimir Putin, went to bed one night and woke up the next morning and said he wanted to invade Ukraine and make it part of Russia. It didn’t matter to him how much damage such an invasion would wreak, how many lives it would take, just like it didn’t matter to Hitler what it would cost for him to remake Europe in his own image.

We in the United States don’t have cities that have had to be rebuilt or great expanses of cemeteries in which are buried the civilian dead of wars. Maybe that is why it’s all so abstract for us. On a continent thousands of miles away from the war that happened in Europe 80 years ago or even the war that is happening in Ukraine right now, today, this minute, it’s someone else’s history, it’s someone else’s problem.

That appears to be the attitude of the Republican Party. Here is a political party that for decades stood for the defense of our nation and the defense of liberty around the world, and now under the thumb of a so-called leader who is now fully showing his totalitarian nature, many Republicans in the House and the Senate have decided all that is in the past. Ukraine is Europe’s problem. Aides and advisers to Donald Trump have already begun to talk about withdrawing from NATO if he is elected. The Heritage Foundation is hosting a meeting between Republicans on Capitol Hill and advisors to Hungary’s Viktor Orban, a close Putin ally, as Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy heads to the White House to make a last-ditch plea for funding before year's end.

If Putin believes Ukraine is not a sovereign nation but a part of Ukraine, well, that’s Ukraine’s problem, not ours, say some Republicans led by Donald Trump and the Heritage Foundation. They express admiration for Putin and the way he runs things in Russia. They say, he knows how to get things done. Donald Trump wants to be like him. He is telling us if he is elected, he will be a dictator on “day one” so he can build his wall, apparently by fiat, and “drill drill drill,” even in national monuments and parks.

Republicans are falling in line behind Trump. That’s what’s going on with the refusal by Republicans to fund the war in Ukraine unless Democrats go along with changes in policies on the border that would effectively build the wall Trump failed to build, not with concrete and steel, but with draconian immigration laws.

Republicans and their putative leader profess to be unconcerned by what would happen if Ukraine runs out of money and artillery shells and rockets and anti-missile batteries that defend Kyiv and other cities. They are unmoved by the scenes of destruction caused by Russian shelling and rockets. They are unmoved by the scenes of mass graves in Bucha and Izium and the reports of the Russian murders that filled them with bodies of dead civilians.

Let me tell you what is happening in Ukraine while the Republican thumb-twiddler caucus turns its head and votes the way Donald Trump tells them to vote. All along the 600-mile front line, Ukrainian soldiers are being killed by Russian artillery, rockets and drone strikes every day. They launch attacks across muddy fields from makeshift bunkers where they defend themselves from Russian shelling. They have no heat. All around them lie the ruins of whatever city they’re defending, all the way from the Russian border to the Black Sea. In Dnipro, where some of the heaviest fighting is going on, it’s freezing, in the low 30’s at night, mid 30’s during the day. It will be 35 on Tuesday and 36 on Wednesday. It will warm up to 47 degrees Fahrenheit on Thursday and rain all that day and part of Friday, making fields and forests even more difficult to move through, slowing resupply convoys, even preventing drone overflights of Russian positions by Ukrainian forces that need the surveillance and intelligence the drones provide.

Conditions for soldiers on the front lines are miserable in the extreme, and conditions in Ukrainian cities are not much better. Russian attacks on energy infrastructure have caused blackouts and no heat in Kyiv and Kharkiv and other large population centers. Trucks filled with dead and wounded soldiers keep coming from the front lines. The wounded need medical care, and the dead need to be buried.

In Washington, D.C., it will be in the high 40s and mid-’50s this week, perfect weather for members of the House and Senate to call an Uber and take a ride into Georgetown to dine at their favorite restaurant on veal scallopini or sushi or fresh-caught Chilean sea bass, a favorite at high end restaurants right now. Tomorrow, they can hold press conferences in the Rotunda of the Capitol and speak defiantly about how they are standing fast against President Biden’s demand for help with funding Ukraine’s war against Russian aggression. A few of them have even talked about a “war on our southern border” that must be funded before they will approve funds for the real war in Ukraine.

There is no war on our southern border, nor are there problems on our northern border, which some Republican members of Congress have also cited as one of their excuses for not funding Ukraine. Next, we’ll be hearing about the “threat from Canada” in the ignorant babble from Republicans on Capitol Hill and the few Republican candidates left on the hustings nibbling like ducks at the crumbs from Trump’s table.

This is a time of disgrace for the United States of America, that we are sitting here on a continent thousands of miles away from the war fought by Ukraine to defend its democracy and its existence from Russia and the threat it will pose to the rest of Europe if Ukraine does not prevail in its war against Russian aggression.

Putin won’t stop with Ukraine. He’s already got allies in Belarus and Hungary, and Russia is funding right-wing political movements in other European states as we speak. But that’s okay with Republicans who plan on electing Trump as president, and he will pull all U.S. funding for NATO and all U.S. troops out of Europe, so they can push for tax cuts based on all our savings from our abject failure to be the leading defender of democracies around the world.

Ask any Republican planning to vote for Trump in 2024, and they’ll tell you: Who needs to defend democracy at home and abroad when they’ve put a man who grins approvingly as he uses the word “dictator” in a sentence talking about himself?

Lucian K. Truscott IV, a graduate of West Point, has had a 50-year career as a journalist, novelist and screenwriter. He has covered stories such as Watergate, the Stonewall riots and wars in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan. He is also the author of five bestselling novels and several unsuccessful motion pictures. He has three children, lives in rural Pennsylvania and spends his time Worrying About the State of Our Nation and madly scribbling in a so-far fruitless attempt to Make Things Better. You can read his daily columns at luciantruscott.substack.com and follow him on Twitter @LucianKTruscott and on Facebook at Lucian K. Truscott IV.

#Lucian K. Truscott lV #Ukraine #rabid Republicans #democracy #NATO #history #Putin #WWII #Europe #Nazis

6 notes · View notes

nicklloydnow · 1 year ago

Text

“Given the public discourse and the attitudes of many Western diplomats and intellectuals over the present war, it increasingly appears that these differences are not recognized by those who (consciously or not) push for a compromise in Ukraine, a kind of “draw.” Many continue to do so, no doubt in good faith and well-intentioned. But history offers abundant evidence that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

So let us first try to define what can be considered a victory for Ukraine, what can be considered a victory for Russia and what can be considered a “draw.”

Ukrainian victory

Ukraine’s victory is the easiest to articulate because Kyiv has clearly defined it and repeatedly emphasized it, mainly through President Volodymyr Zelenskiy. In particular, it means a restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity within the pre-2014 borders, future security guarantees, criminal consequences for Russian war crimes and reparations for the material damage caused. Ukrainian membership in NATO and the European Union should also be part of (and a guarantor of) its victory.

Let us add that the legitimacy of these objectives, and accordingly of a Ukrainian victory, is quite strong. They are in accordance with international law, are supported by most of the Ukrainian population and are promoted by legitimate political representatives elected in free and democratic elections.

Russian victory

Victory for Russia is much harder to define, for several reasons. At first, Moscow’s aim in invading Ukraine was to take over the whole of the country and remove its legitimate, democratically elected government. After a blitzkrieg fiasco in the spring of 2022, the goal became taking control of as much of Ukraine as possible, and then annexing four specific regions (Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson) to Russia.

Exactly what the Kremlin’s goal is today is not entirely clear. In one sense, the details do not terribly matter. The fundamental, unquestionable goal of President Vladimir Putin’s Russia can be seen from the outset as denying a Ukrainian victory: preventing Ukraine from existing as an independent, sovereign country that not only controls its own territory but also freely decides its future based on the will of the majority of its people. This is the basic objective that Russia is pursuing in Ukraine and which it has been pursuing ruthlessly and aggressively, in contravention of international law – not only today but since at least 2014.

Two outcomes

In this light, there are not three, but only two essential scenarios for the course of Russia’s war against Ukraine. There is no “draw.” Any outcome other than a Ukrainian victory, as they define it, would qualify as a victory for Russia.

At the same time, Ukraine will not be able to win without the help of its Western allies. While already at historically high levels, this assistance remains insufficient to deliver a Ukrainian victory. And, to reiterate, any compromise, frozen conflict or other form of stalemate means a Russian victory.

Neither Ukraine nor Russia will get to decide which of the two possible scenarios is realized. Both sides are doing and will do everything they can to win, and they cannot do much more than they are now doing. Instead, the winner will be decided by the West. The question is whether it will understand that there are only two viable options and help Ukraine further and faster than it has done so far.

Almost a year ago, I wrote about why I do not consider any compromise with President Putin to be a solution to the war. Over the past year, there has been ample evidence suggesting that a “draw” means victory for Russia. Yet the risk of such an outcome has not declined, but rather increased.”

“A deadlock is exactly what Russian president Vladimir Putin wants, because it allows him to plant the idea of perpetual stalemate in the minds of western leaders who, staring at a difficult economic outlook for 2024, want a settlement.

There are still leaders who rightly care about Kyiv’s need to push Russian troops back to the internationally recognised border. Joe Biden is one who believes the billions of dollars handed to Ukraine are an investment in world peace.

It would be tragic if Biden became a lonely figure. Britain and France are still on board, though their weapons resources are running low. The European Commission is a staunch defender of Ukraine and preparing to welcome it as an EU member. Can the same be said of Italy and Germany?

(…)

Tim Ash, a fellow at the thinktank Chatham House, has argued that the $400bn of Russian capital tied up in western banks and markets should be seized and given to Ukraine for its war effort. At the moment, the funds are merely frozen.

In what he expects to be the first of many such decisions, the international court of arbitration in The Hague ruled last week that Russia must pay $267m in damages to DTEK, Ukraine’s largest private energy company, in compensation for assets in Crimea that Russia seized when it illegally annexed the peninsula in 2014.

Without foreign exchange, Russia will struggle to maintain its war effort. Last month, to prevent Russian companies and wealthy individuals taking roubles out of the country, the central bank was forced to issue capital control restrictions. Interest rates also jumped to 15%.

(…)

Russia’s defence budget has risen to the equivalent of 3.9% of GDP this year, from 2.7% in 2021. It will jump by more than 70% in 2024, reaching about 6% of GDP, according to a Reuters assessment of official plans.

And hardware supplied by the US to Kyiv is making a difference. While the Ukrainian army is bogged down as winter approaches, the UK’s Ministry of Defence has issued an intelligence update saying Russian air defence has suffered significant losses. This suggests that if the west can stay the course, Russia’s capability will crumble.

(…)

Ash is among many to argue that the cost of letting Russia grind Ukraine into a defeat will be much higher than that of helping Ukraine prevail. A victorious Putin will pull every lever to bring about economic and political chaos among his enemies. Ukraine’s allies must hang together and stay the course.”

#russia #ukraine #war

4 notes · View notes

myroslaw · 1 year ago

Text

🌍 Mapping 13 Countries Inside Ukraine 🇺🇦: A Fascinating Thought Experiment! 🌍

Ever wondered how big Ukraine really is? Let's play a game of geopolitical Tetris! 🎮 📍 Countries Inside Ukraine's Borders 📍

🇦🇱 Albania finds its place in the Northwest, specifically in Volhynia.

Historical Note: Like Ukraine, Albania also struggled for its independence and faced various invasions.

2. 🇨🇿 Czechia snugly fits in the West, in the regions of Galicia-Podolia.

Did You Know?: Both the Czech Republic and Ukraine are Slavic countries with historical ties that span over a thousand years. They have shared moments of solidarity, especially during the Velvet Revolution and Ukraine's own struggle for democracy. The Czech civil society has often been supportive of Ukraine's European aspirations, and both nations have a rich folklore tradition.

3. 🇸🇮 Slovenia nestles in the Southwest, in Transcarpathia.

Cultural Insight: Slovenia and Ukraine share a love for mountainous landscapes.

4. 🇦🇹 Austria takes its spot in the North, covering areas like Polesia, Kyiv, and Siveria. Historical Insight: the Austrian Empire once controlled the region of Galicia, which is now part of modern-day Ukraine. The Austrian rule has left a lasting impact on the culture and architecture of the region.

5. 🇸🇰 Slovakia finds its home right in the Center of Ukraine.

Historical Ties: Slovakia and Ukraine share a border and have a complex history of interaction.

6. 🇷🇸 Serbia is located in the Black Sea Coast and Zaporizhzhia region.

Conflict Legacy and External Influence: Both countries have recent histories of conflict and are still dealing with its aftermath. Russia often leverages shared historical narratives to influence Serbian politics, further complicating Serbia's geopolitical stance.

7. 🇲🇪 Montenegro fits into Southern Bessarabia/Budjak.

Tourism Angle: Montenegro is a tourism gem, something Ukraine is aspiring to become.

8-9. 🇨🇾 Cyprus and 🇹🇷 Northern Cyprus share the southern part of Kherson region.

Political Intrigue: The division of Cyprus into two entities echoes Ukraine's own territorial issues.

10. 🇭🇺 Hungary is situated in the East, covering Poltava region and Sloboda Ukraine.

Historical and Current Ties: Hungary ruled over Transcarpathia for centuries, a region primarily inhabited by Ukrainians. During its rule, Hungary implemented policies aimed at assimilating the local population. Even today, Hungarian politicians occasionally make territorial claims against Ukraine and other neighboring countries.

11-12. 🇮🇱 Israel and 🇵🇸 Palestine are located in the Azov Sea region.

Historical Trauma: Prior to World War II, Ukraine had one of the largest Jewish populations in the world. In many cities, Jews made up between 20% to 50% of the population. Tragically, most were exterminated by German Nazis during the Holocaust, with estimates suggesting that around 1.5 million Ukrainian Jews were killed.

13. 🇦🇲 Armenia finds its place in Crimea.

Historical Trauma: Both Ukraine and Armenia have faced historical tragedies, including genocides and wars.

📊 By the Numbers 📊

Total Area: 511,000 km² (That's 92,000 km² less than Ukraine! Enough room left for Switzerland and Denmark 🇨🇭🇩🇰)

Population: 66.1 million (That's 42% more than Ukraine! 🤯)

Wealth: Only Austria 🇦🇹 and Israel 🇮🇱 are considered wealthy. The rest range from average to poor.

GDP: A staggering $1.9 trillion (nominal) and $2.8 trillion (PPP), which is 9 times Ukraine's GDP pre-Russian invasion. 💰

🤔 What Does This All Mean? 🤔

All these countries have faced historical challenges similar to Ukraine, especially the scars left by the World Wars. Yet, their paths have diverged significantly, leading to different economic and social outcomes.

💬 Your Thoughts? 💬

What do you think led to such drastic differences? Share your thoughts, theories, or even personal stories related to these countries.

#maps #Geopolitics #Ukraine #ThoughtExperiment #History #Economy #Europe

4 notes · View notes

mariacallous · 2 months ago

Text

RFE/RL’s Russian investigative unit Systema has obtained a copy of Russia’s initial proposal for a “peace agreement” with Ukraine, which the Kremlin drafted shortly after launching its full-scale war against the country in 2022. The document reveals exactly what Russia was seeking in the full-scale war’s first weeks and how it envisioned Ukraine’s future if it surrendered. Meduza shares an abridged translation of Systema’s report on the previously unpublished proposal, what it shows about Putin’s intentions, and how Russia’s demands evolved in the subsequent months as it failed to achieve its goals on the battlefield.

Journalists from Systema have obtained the earliest known document in which Moscow laid out its demands for Ukraine after launching the full-scale invasion. Russia presented the proposal, which contains a list of conditions for a ceasefire and peace agreement, to Ukraine’s delegation during the countries’ third round of talks in Belarus on March 7, 2022. Systema received the document from a Ukrainian source familiar with the course of the negotiations and a source from the Russian side verified its authenticity.

The first official meeting between Russian and Ukrainian negotiators took place just a few days after the start of the full-scale war. The Ukrainian delegation, led by Verkhovna Rada deputy Davyd Arakhamia, traveled to Poland before taking a helicopter to Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko’s Lyaskovichi Residence near the Polish-Belarusian border. There, the group met with a Russian delegation led by Putin aide Vladimir Medinsky.

The document consists of six pages containing the draft agreement’s main text and four pages of attachments. The proposal’s 18 articles touch on a wide range of issues, including requirements for Ukraine’s neutrality, border placement, and humanitarian concerns such as language, religion, and history.

The proposal was written long before Russia’s annexation of four Ukrainian regions in September 2022 and does not include the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions. However, it does include Russia’s long-standing demand for Ukraine to fully forgo any claims to Crimea and Sevastopol as well as the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.

In the initial version of this “peace agreement,” Russia also insisted on the near-total disarmament of Ukraine under Moscow’s supervision, the country’s isolation from Western assistance, and the long-term stationing of Russian troops on the territories captured in the war’s first weeks. Some of these demands remained unchanged throughout the entire negotiations process.

In early March, the Ukrainian delegation tentatively agreed to what appears to have been Russia’s main demand: to become a “permanently neutral state” that would never join NATO or allow foreign troops to be stationed on its territory. Throughout the negotiation process in 2022, until its suspension in April, this point remained unchanged and was not disputed by either side.

After comparing this version of the proposed agreement with later ones, Systema’s journalists were able to identify multiple points that either disappeared from the document, were heavily modified, or that Ukraine’s delegation began refusing to discuss altogether. These details make clear just how extensive Russia’s demands were.

Russia’s initial demands

The Ukrainian army must be reduced to a minimum: 50,000 people, including 1,500 officers (five times smaller than Ukraine’s existing army in 2022).

Ukraine must not “develop, produce, invent, or deploy on its territory any missile weapons of any type with a range greater than 250 kilometers.” Russia also reserves the right to ban Ukraine from using “any other types of weapons that may be developed as a result of scientific research” in the future.

Ukraine must “recognize the independence” of the self-proclaimed Donetsk and Luhansk “people’s republics,” including all of the territory within the borders of Ukraine’s Donetsk and Luhansk regions (despite the fact that Russia controlled only part of these territories, as is still the case today).

Ukraine must assume the costs of repairing all of the infrastructure in Donbas that had been destroyed since 2014.

Ukraine and its partners must lift all sanctions against Russia and withdraw all lawsuits filed against Russia since 2014.

Ukraine must make Russian an official state language and restore all of the property rights of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate.

Ukraine must “repeal of and permanently ban any prohibitions of symbols associated with victory over Nazism”; in other words, it must re-legalize Soviet and communist symbols.

What Ukraine would receive in return

Essentially the only things Russia offered Ukraine in this initial proposal were a “ceasefire regime” and “measures to halt combat operations.” There was no mention of any withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukrainian territory; Russia only committed to not occupying territory beyond what it already controlled.

At the same time, Moscow wanted Ukraine to withdraw all its forces to their permanent bases (or to places “designated by Russia”), and for Kyiv’s foreign partners to immediately end all assistance to Ukraine and withdraw any personnel involved with Ukrainian troops, including military advisors.

Russian troops, as well as national guard forces, were to remain in place until “all of the requirements of this agreement” were fulfilled. Since these requirements included large-scale legislative changes, disarmament, and international guarantees, the agreement could feasibly have seen the Russian army stationed near Kyiv for years. Russia also proposed taking control of the troop withdrawal process, allowing for the involvement of Ukraine and, if necessary, the U.N. Secretary-General.

“A distinction should be made between Putin’s public statements about the invasion’s goals and his real intentions, which have become clearer over time,” Eric Ciaramella, a Ukraine and Russia expert at the Carnegie Center, told Systema. For example, he said, while Putin used the term “denazification” in public statements, the word was concealing his true goals: the violent overthrow of Ukraine’s democratically elected leadership, its replacement with a pro-Russian administration, the occupation of Kyiv and other major Ukrainian cities, and the establishment of filtration camps for patriotic and pro-Ukrainian activists and political leaders.

The same is true of Putin’s demand for Ukraine’s “neutrality,” Ciaramella said: “Some people hearing the word ‘neutrality’ might think, ‘What’s wrong with that? Putin just doesn’t want to see Ukraine in NATO.’ But in my view, he was actually talking about something more radical — not neutrality, but the neutralization of Ukraine as an independent state. Russia’s goal from the very beginning was to destroy Ukraine’s capacity for self-defense.”

This interpretation of Putin’s goals is supported by the document from March 7, including Russia’s demand for the Ukrainian army to be reduced to 50,000 people. “In this paradigm, Ukraine would simply have no ability to defend itself,” Ciaramella said.

In this early version of its “peace agreement,” Russia was effectively proposing the terms of Ukraine’s surrender, Ciaramella said. “The document was structured as if Ukraine were the aggressor and had been defeated on the battlefield — which wasn’t the case, of course,” he told Systema. “It’s hard to say if this was a genuine attempt at negotiation, as such terms would be unacceptable to any Ukrainian. They would have neutralized Ukraine to the point of leaving it utterly defenseless.”

How Russia’s conditions changed over time

The negotiations in the war’s first weeks were intense: after their initial meetings in Minsk in early March, the Russian and Ukrainian delegations frequently held calls, exchanged proposals, and recorded new versions and revisions on a daily basis.

“It was clear from the Russian delegation’s behavior that Putin was personally overseeing the process,” a Ukrainian politician with knowledge of the negotiations told Systema. “Sometimes when the [Ukrainian delegation] proposed something, [Russian delegation leader Vladimir] Medinsky would get up and leave to make a call — clearly to Moscow. Then he would return and present Putin’s stance on the matter.” Other sources from both Moscow and Kyiv who spoke to Systema confirmed that Putin appeared to be genuinely interested in signing some sort of agreement.

Comparing Russia’s proposals from March 7, 2022, to the last version of the draft agreement from April 15 of the same year, the degree to which Ukraine’s delegation managed to convince Moscow to reduce its demands and alter key points is striking. “Ukrainian negotiators were able to remove some of the most offensive points and include important elements for Ukraine, such as the need for security guarantees,” notes Ciaramella, who has examined several different versions of the agreement.

The most significant change concerned the security guarantee for a neutral Ukraine from the proposed signatory states (which included the U.K., China, the U.S., and France; Russia also proposed including Belarus, while Ukraine proposed Turkey). This article was modeled after NATO’s Article 5: if Ukraine were attacked in the future, the other countries would be obligated to defend it with military forces.

Another main change addressed Ukraine’s territorial integrity and international recognition of its borders. In March 2022, Russia’s proposed agreement stated that Crimea and Sevastopol were part of Russia, that there were independent Donetsk and Luhansk “republics,” and that the rest of Ukraine needed to be disarmed and rewrite its laws.

By April, the two sides had agreed on a different framework: Ukraine would remain within its internationally recognized borders, including Crimea, Sevastopol, and certain unspecified territories that would not be covered by security guarantees. The communiqué adopted at the end of March in Istanbul stated that the status of Crimea and Sevastopol would be resolved diplomatically. The provision was “stunning,” as Foreign Affairs wrote in 2024: for many years, Russia had publicly insisted that Crimea and Sevastopol were unequivocally Russian regions, and now it seemed to be “tacitly [admitting] that was not the case.”

In the April agreement, the Ukrainian and Russian delegations still disagreed on the size of Ukraine’s future army. Ukraine insisted on a force of 250,000 servicemen (its approximate size before the full-scale invasion), while Russia proposed limiting it to 85,000.

Additionally, the Russian side demanded that Ukraine’s troops lay down their arms and return to their barracks. In response, the Ukrainian side made a symmetrical demand: Russia’s troops should lay down their arms and return to their permanent bases. Medinsky was surprised by this proposal, one of the participants recounted: “He said it felt like Ukrainian troops were standing in Red Square while the Russians were expected to wave a white flag from the Kremlin. The response [from the Ukrainian side] was: ‘We’re just asking you for the same thing you’re asking of us.’” The delegations were ultimately unable to reach a consensus on the issue of troop withdrawals.

What Putin wants today

There’s no such thing as the “goals of the special military operation,” according to a source familiar with Putin’s position on the negotiations process: these “goals” will be whatever Putin decides is necessary for him to declare victory at the moment he decides to end the war. “If he wants, he’ll say he created a land corridor to Crimea and reclaimed ’Novorossiya’; if he prefers instead, he’ll say that he destroyed all of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. He can declare any outcome he chooses to be his victory and the achievement of his goals, at any moment.”

The only question is when Putin will decide to end the war — and what battlefield conditions are necessary for this to happen.

In October 2024, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky presented his “victory plan”: a detailed outline of what the Ukrainian authorities believe Western partners should provide to Ukraine to prevent Russia from feeling it has the upper hand, pushing it to freeze the conflict and engage in negotiations. Among other things, this includes authorizing Kyiv to conduct deep strikes within Russia and admitting Ukraine into NATO.

Western officials and NATO leaders have increasingly spoken in recent months about the inevitability of Ukraine’s path to NATO. At the same time, there’s still plenty of disagreement on this issue among Ukraine’s allies, as Le Monde noted last month: the ultimate outcome will depend both on the results of the upcoming U.S. presidential elections and the future positions of individual NATO members.

According to Eric Ciaramella, however, the underlying logic of these statements is to influence how Putin reevaluates his goals in the war: the situation could change if he decides there’s no possible scenario in which Ukraine will capitulate and return to Russia’s orbit. “I think Western leaders are coming to the conclusion that the only way to make Putin have this realization is to make serious progress on a set of security guarantees for Ukraine, which could very well include NATO membership. Because that’s the only form of security guarantees in Ukraine that Russia truly understands.”

So far, however, there’s no sign that Putin has come to the same conclusion. In the summer of 2024, the Russian president said that for any negotiations to begin, Ukraine must agree that Crimea as well as the Donetsk, Luhansk, Kherson, and Zaporizhzhia regions are part of Russia. A source familiar with Putin’s current position on negotiations told Systema that after the Ukrainian military’s cross-border offensive in Russia’s Kursk region, Putin has been actively conveying to his inner circle that Russia will fight until Ukraine capitulates completely.

2 notes · View notes