Russia would like Ukraine to opt for neutrality, but allows itself to take Donbass and Luhansk + some other territories. Is this really serious?
If Russia were credible, it would offer neutrality and a guarantee that Ukrainian territory would be respected (possibly outside Crimea at first, as long as there is no agreement on Crimea).
Instead, Russia takes, supposedly in the name of independent republics, a good part of the Ukrainian territory and asks, in addition, for neutrality by not joining NATO or its successor: an European defense
Russia intends to impose both on Ukraine, first, and then on its other neighbors.
Which country will accept to have part of its territory amputated for the benefit of Russia or its allies and at the same time accept to be neutral?
The immediate result is that all countries will rush to NATO.
NATO, which had an almost flat electroencephalogram, has just found a new youth and a real utility: to defend itself against Russia, resurrecting its initial goals to defend itself against the USSR.
So, can we really make a proposal for the Donbass when Russia occupies a whole series of territories around it and allows itself to bomb and destroy elsewhere than in the Donbass?
It seems difficult. We understand that Russia considers massive bombing as a good way to advance negotiations in the hope of surrender. But unfortunately, this leads to a blockage.
Then ? To be resumed when Russia’s intentions are clearer.
To be continued if there is new information
updated on April 11, 2022