So the Xi – Putin summit came and went. Obviously it was bigged-up ahead of time, given the release of the China peace plan for the war in Ukraine on February 24.Thanks for reading @tashecon blog! Subscribe for free to receive new posts and support my work.
Very interesting piece. I would say with regards China not wanting Europe to fall completely into the US camp. That that ship has sailed. There is increasing wariness of China on most levels - economic, environmental and human rights. Even if Russia lost and a friendly regime replaced Putins I don’t think Eastern Europe will trust to let them back in a second (or third) time for many years. And by then it’s likely the US energy position will be entrenched and net zero itself may have gone some distance. Nordstream 2 opening again would require extreme tenacity post Ukraine to bypass the east as well.
China at this stage below the US says it wants a multiplayer world as its pushing up but in time as it’s wolf warrior diplomacy gets louder it will soon ditch that for any naked national interest.
And one thing thing that will end in day one any hope of Europe not hugging America or there not being a divided world into US and Chinese camps is if China invaded Taiwan. Lines will be drawn.
The Budapest Memorandum was so effective in providing security for Ukraine...
From my office in Kyiv, agreeing to give Russia lands it stole in return for more guarantees is not particularly comforting for the medium or long term. I hope the West has the presence of mind and will to see Russia kicked out of the Donbas and Crimea. Anything short if that is sending a message to dictators that they can get away with a little invasion, when the West is not looking, and is therefore bad for world peace in the long term, and Ukraine from the second the paper is signed.
Hi, Tim, thanks for this piece, very interesting to read your thoughts :) question here, security guarantees, what do you see as a strong one?
I mean, this is a no brainer, that w/o NATO (= Art 5), putin/russia will come back to Ukraine, 1) they always did that in prev history, 2) russia always starts new wars, I believe this trend is clear starting from 1991.
So I think NATO is a "holy cow" here and putin never will agree to that, but what would be a strong enough security guarantees here instead of? Like, other countries joining the war, if russia attacks, alike Art 5? But it will be treated as Art 5, as all our allies are NATO countries :)) chicken and egg, as a result. If not joining the war, then could it be treated as "strong guarantee"?
This is all questions in my head I don't have answer to, I admit, that they are complicated indeed, what are your thoughts?
Very interesting piece. I would say with regards China not wanting Europe to fall completely into the US camp. That that ship has sailed. There is increasing wariness of China on most levels - economic, environmental and human rights. Even if Russia lost and a friendly regime replaced Putins I don’t think Eastern Europe will trust to let them back in a second (or third) time for many years. And by then it’s likely the US energy position will be entrenched and net zero itself may have gone some distance. Nordstream 2 opening again would require extreme tenacity post Ukraine to bypass the east as well.
China at this stage below the US says it wants a multiplayer world as its pushing up but in time as it’s wolf warrior diplomacy gets louder it will soon ditch that for any naked national interest.
And one thing thing that will end in day one any hope of Europe not hugging America or there not being a divided world into US and Chinese camps is if China invaded Taiwan. Lines will be drawn.
The Budapest Memorandum was so effective in providing security for Ukraine...
From my office in Kyiv, agreeing to give Russia lands it stole in return for more guarantees is not particularly comforting for the medium or long term. I hope the West has the presence of mind and will to see Russia kicked out of the Donbas and Crimea. Anything short if that is sending a message to dictators that they can get away with a little invasion, when the West is not looking, and is therefore bad for world peace in the long term, and Ukraine from the second the paper is signed.
Hi, Tim, thanks for this piece, very interesting to read your thoughts :) question here, security guarantees, what do you see as a strong one?
I mean, this is a no brainer, that w/o NATO (= Art 5), putin/russia will come back to Ukraine, 1) they always did that in prev history, 2) russia always starts new wars, I believe this trend is clear starting from 1991.
So I think NATO is a "holy cow" here and putin never will agree to that, but what would be a strong enough security guarantees here instead of? Like, other countries joining the war, if russia attacks, alike Art 5? But it will be treated as Art 5, as all our allies are NATO countries :)) chicken and egg, as a result. If not joining the war, then could it be treated as "strong guarantee"?
This is all questions in my head I don't have answer to, I admit, that they are complicated indeed, what are your thoughts?