Comments by "Sean Cidy" (@seancidy6008) on "Ukraine's paradox about peace negotiations" video.

  1. Ukraine may have missed that a federalised Donbass though the Steimeier modification of Minsk would have been no real concession to Russia because the European members of Nato veto would have prevented it so the unrealism was one both sides from the begining. The Russians can destroy the Ukrainians' weapons and the West will replace them with better ones. Ukraine's fighting manpower is the thing the Russians would be better concentrating on attriting, and they seem to be doing that. Despite the fanfaronaded reiteration of Ukraine (and Georgia) joining Nato being made every year since 2008 by Nato, Ukraine joining Nato was a dead letter after the invasion of Georgia, so Russia's fears were not very rational. Yet that does not mean they were not genuine. While Zelensky was in Paris in 2019 negotiating for peace through a modified Minsk agreement that would have obviated any need for Russia to stay in a special autonomous status Donbass (because Donbass although a part of Ukraine could have constitutionally prevented it joining Nato). it was made clear to him if he signed then he would be overthrown by 2014 style mass demos. Currently, Zelensky would not be able to agree to any settlement that did not entail the return of Crimea (dubious the majority in Crimea want this), which many in the West are encouraging Ukraine to insist on as a rock bottom demand; it does not seem to me at least merely an initial negotiating position. I think there is an unspoken agreement in the West to not say anything that can be interpreted as encouraging to Russia. Nevertheless, General Milley said Russia and Ukraine have taken 100,000 casualties each. Ukrainians between 16 and 60 who have been forbidden from leaving the country constitute a reserve army of manpower and yet is Russia substantially different apart from having three times the population. Men not machinery are the best target for Russia, and overall commander Surovikin seems to approve or he would have terminated the Bakhmut operation which the Wagner boss says is an attrition one. Now if the West actual gives Ukraine troops, Russia can forget about even emerging with a draw, but it seems most unlikely those things will happen.
    2
  2.  @kevinwarburton2938  We have been told that Bakhmut is strategically unimportant but I would point out the staunch Ukrainian defence of it suggests otherwise. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=du8IaRJWDsE Retired Major General Tim Cross, a British logistics expert. allows that even although the Russian high command were not told about Putin's order to invade Ukraine until very late and had no opportunity to plan properly for it, the Russian army has been exposed as woefully weak. However he says trying for negotiation and a settlement in the next 3 to 6 months avoids whatever danger there is is loudly announcing that the boot we have on the Russian neck will be pressed down harder until they quit. A Russian winter offensive that might improve their positions so greatly that Ukraine will be forced to negotiate is far from impossible according to Cross.
    1
  3. Ukraine can't negotiate because it can't trust Russia? Well, given that the Russians no doubt now regret halting their offensive in 2015 against a weak and demoralized Ukrainian army in return for the Minsk agreement, which proved worthless because Ukraine only agreed to it as a ploy to stop the fighting because they were losing (Poroshenko has admitted this) , I doubt Russia would take Ukraine's word on anything now. .
    1