Thanks. I think the reality is both Ukraine and Russia can fight a long war, but there are risks there for both. I think at this stage both would prefer some kind of peace, it’s just a question of what that will be. For Ukraine security is key, as the state can only move forward with recovery and reconstruction if there is safety for investors. Putin obviously wants the opposite, he wants to ensure that Ukraine is as insecure as possible to give him future options for intervention. The issue of NATO membership is something of a side show. Putin never invaded because of the risk of NATO enlargement - as we can now see NATO was never in a rush to give that to Ukraine. He invaded because he wants Ukraine, full stop. It’s a colonial ambition for Putin. Ukraine can be given security without NATO membership - Israel seems to be pretty secure, even in a conventional sense because it gets the full list of Western conventional kit, to F35s. Give Ukraine the military tech and it can defend itself.
it's very interesting. as a complete outsider who simply reads what is available on the Russia situation from a variety of sources, your take is very different than that of Simon Hunt, who seems to believe that Putin and Russia have the upper hand in any negotiations that will be upcoming by virtue of their superior military power and the nuclear threat. certainly they are superior to Ukraine, but vs. all of NATO that seems a stretch.
quite frankly, both sides make a persuasive case, so I'm not sure what to believe, the one thing that is consistent, though, is that mainstream media cannot be trusted given their history of pushing a narrative rather than reporting news. it is why I seek outside sources like yourself and others.
Thanks. I think the reality is both Ukraine and Russia can fight a long war, but there are risks there for both. I think at this stage both would prefer some kind of peace, it’s just a question of what that will be. For Ukraine security is key, as the state can only move forward with recovery and reconstruction if there is safety for investors. Putin obviously wants the opposite, he wants to ensure that Ukraine is as insecure as possible to give him future options for intervention. The issue of NATO membership is something of a side show. Putin never invaded because of the risk of NATO enlargement - as we can now see NATO was never in a rush to give that to Ukraine. He invaded because he wants Ukraine, full stop. It’s a colonial ambition for Putin. Ukraine can be given security without NATO membership - Israel seems to be pretty secure, even in a conventional sense because it gets the full list of Western conventional kit, to F35s. Give Ukraine the military tech and it can defend itself.
it's very interesting. as a complete outsider who simply reads what is available on the Russia situation from a variety of sources, your take is very different than that of Simon Hunt, who seems to believe that Putin and Russia have the upper hand in any negotiations that will be upcoming by virtue of their superior military power and the nuclear threat. certainly they are superior to Ukraine, but vs. all of NATO that seems a stretch.
quite frankly, both sides make a persuasive case, so I'm not sure what to believe, the one thing that is consistent, though, is that mainstream media cannot be trusted given their history of pushing a narrative rather than reporting news. it is why I seek outside sources like yourself and others.
thanks for the continued updates