|
NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source. |
On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end.
That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution.
When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well.
The fighting is now about the conditions of this freezing (or pausing) as that will decide if Ukraine has any long term future.
|
Zurich15324 Posts
On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well.
Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution?
|
On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution?
Korea?
|
Zurich15324 Posts
On April 28 2023 16:55 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution? Korea?
And a Korea style resolution would have been possible not impossible in Summer 2022. But, like I said, with the annexation Putin made such a resolution impossible. A potential "East Ukraine" is not in the cards anymore since this is now Russia according to one side.
|
On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution?
Depends on the definition of 'peacefully'.
But as savage as it was, Iraq - Iran war ended with minimal territory change.
It even had an actual peace and not the forever cease-fire of Korea.
Granted, sides were similar in strength and it took a lot of blood and arm-twisting to get there.
|
Zurich15324 Posts
On April 28 2023 17:03 pmp10 wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution? Depends on the definition of 'peacefully'. But as savage as it was, Iraq - Iran war ended with minimal territory change. It even had an actual peace and not the forever cease-fire of Korea. Granted, sides were similar in strength and it took a lot of blood and arm-twisting to get there.
And with the annexation of parts of Ukraine, Putin has made this type of resolution - return to pre-war borders - impossible.
|
Pretty sure the concept of pre-war borders is dead at this point.
For which war borders would they be anyway - 2014 or 2022?
Do you mean 'resolution' in the diplomatic sense of Ukraine and Russia fully recognizing territory held by the other side?
That might be impossible (at least near-term) but it doesn't mean hot war must continue.
|
On April 28 2023 17:07 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 17:03 pmp10 wrote:On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution? Depends on the definition of 'peacefully'. But as savage as it was, Iraq - Iran war ended with minimal territory change. It even had an actual peace and not the forever cease-fire of Korea. Granted, sides were similar in strength and it took a lot of blood and arm-twisting to get there. And with the annexation of parts of Ukraine, Putin has made this type of resolution - return to pre-war borders - impossible.
By that logic no war could ever end, except if one side dissolved entirely. It is almost always about contrasting claims of land ownership and in the end one or both sides have to accept the reality that their borders don't match their claims. Depending on how bad things went, they just have to accept those borders for peace or also have to rescind those claims then. Annexing those provinces is just another nice fancy word for claiming the territories. It makes it harder to walk back on it without losing face, but in the end always the reality of who controls what trumps any kind of claims.
Both Koreas claimed to own the entire Korean peninsula. They didn't bother "annexing", because they already considered it theirs. Somehow the war still ended with neither side having their claims fulfilled.
Argentina proclaimed the Falklands to be theirs, conquered them, celebrated the Malvinas to be back in Argentina, lost them to the counter-attack, and then had to settle that they still claim them, but simply can't control them and have to make a pinky promise to not try to attack them again.
|
I feel talk about a frozen conflict situation is premature when the Ukrainian counter attack is still being prepared.
|
I'm not even sure Ukraine would want a peace with the current borders (2022 borders) anymore. They are in a better position than ever to take Crimea back
|
Zurich15324 Posts
On April 28 2023 17:43 mahrgell wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 17:07 zatic wrote:On April 28 2023 17:03 pmp10 wrote:On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution? Depends on the definition of 'peacefully'. But as savage as it was, Iraq - Iran war ended with minimal territory change. It even had an actual peace and not the forever cease-fire of Korea. Granted, sides were similar in strength and it took a lot of blood and arm-twisting to get there. And with the annexation of parts of Ukraine, Putin has made this type of resolution - return to pre-war borders - impossible. By that logic no war could ever end, except if one side dissolved entirely. It is almost always about contrasting claims of land ownership and in the end one or both sides have to accept the reality that their borders don't match their claims. Depending on how bad things went, they just have to accept those borders for peace or also have to rescind those claims then. Annexing those provinces is just another nice fancy word for claiming the territories. It makes it harder to walk back on it without losing face, but in the end always the reality of who controls what trumps any kind of claims. Both Koreas claimed to own the entire Korean peninsula. They didn't bother "annexing", because they already considered it theirs. Somehow the war still ended with neither side having their claims fulfilled. Argentina proclaimed the Falklands to be theirs, conquered them, celebrated the Malvinas to be back in Argentina, lost them to the counter-attack, and then had to settle that they still claim them, but simply can't control them and have to make a pinky promise to not try to attack them again.
That's not at all what I am saying. The Falkland war ended because one side lost. It doesn't get more clear cut. If Russia loses militarily and is completely pushed out of Ukraine the war can also end no matter what Putin "annexes". If Ukraine loses and has to give up the occupied territories then the war can also end. Those are the bitter ends which I mentioned.
I just don't see a peaceful resolution that does not involve one side losing. That was made impossible by the annexation.
|
|
|
Russian Federation605 Posts
On April 28 2023 16:29 zatic wrote:Show nested quote +On April 28 2023 16:02 pmp10 wrote:On April 27 2023 22:13 zatic wrote:
For real. The last chance for peace was in Summer 2022, when Putin could still have declared victory and gone home. With the annexation Putin went all-in on war to whatever bitter end. That's terribly dramatic but historically worse wars have been frozen without clear resolution. When neither side is unable to win much ground this will likely happen here as well. Do you have an example of a worse war that has ended peacefully without a clear resolution?
First Karabakh war. Though "peacfully" as with agreement to cease the hostilities, not to acknowledge captured territory.
|
Zurich15324 Posts
Worse than the Russian Ukraine war of 2022? Hardly.
I'm sure there are countless of low intensity, low stake conflicts that kind of fizzle out. But clearly we are in a different ball game here.
|
Russian Federation605 Posts
On April 28 2023 23:38 zatic wrote:
Worse than the Russian Ukraine war of 2022? Hardly.
I'm sure there are countless of low intensity, low stake conflicts that kind of fizzle out. But clearly we are in a different ball game here.
Then it depends what do you mean by "low intensity" and "low stake". For the world overall - yeah, it was nothing, I think back in the 90s few people in countries beside former USSR ever heard of it. Yet for the parties involved stakes were very high (Karabakh in 1994-2020 period controlled 13% of Azerbaijan's territory) and even though the intensity of it wasn't comparable to Russian-Ukraine war, Iraqi wars, Yom Kippur War etc, it still was extremely taxing for both parties - by the time of final ceasefire both sides were running very low of soldiers and heavy equipment, hence the agreement for status quo.
Plus we'll have to define what "without clear resolution" means. Because if Russia is able to keep currently conrolled territories for years forward, even without any formal peace treaties (like PRC and Kuomintang were shooting at each other for years over the Taiwan strait after 1949), I doubt that anyone will percieve it as "White peace", and more like "Minor Russian victory".
There were plenty of conflicts in history where victorious side gained much less and/or at much higher cost than they expected to, but they still are considered as a "victory" for that side (albeit minor/hard one). Examples - Winter War, Russian-Turkish war of 1878, Crimean War.
Both examples of major conflicts ending in stalemate were presented above (Korea and Iran-Iraq war), and both were ended because neither side in them had capacity to conduct any major successful offensive. But I believe that it just happened over the flow of war (especially in Korea), that borders basically did not shift. In Korea it could easily be 50 km to the north or south, depending on how certain military operations would have developed. In the end, it's the inability to conduct offensive on both sides that led to the peace, not the fact that they were sitting on their previous borders.
|
Zurich15324 Posts
My whole point is that by annexing parts of Ukraine, Putin massively raised the stakes to the point that there are few exits left but fighting to the bitter end. That's what going all-in means.
A minor Russian victory like you describe is one such exit: Both sides exhaust themselves - fight to the bitter end - to the point that none can muster any offensive anymore, and occupied Ukraine stays occupied. Exactly what I was saying.
Can I ask anyone disagreeing with my opinion what a realistic path to peace today could look like?
|
On April 29 2023 01:31 zatic wrote:
My whole point is that by annexing parts of Ukraine, Putin massively raised the stakes to the point that there are few exits left but fighting to the bitter end. That's what going all-in means.
A minor Russian victory like you describe is one such exit: Both sides exhaust themselves - fight to the bitter end - to the point that none can muster any offensive anymore, and occupied Ukraine stays occupied. Exactly what I was saying.
Can I ask anyone disagreeing with my opinion what a realistic path to peace today could look like?
Not sure what qualifies as peace, but it's basically Ukraine negotiating an undesirable settlement.
"Why would they do that?"
Because if they wait until it's clear to everyone that it is a hopeless stalemate, they'll be in an even worse bargaining position.
That said, I'm not sure I'd call it "peace". I'd probably go with a "non-comprehensive negative peace"
|
On April 29 2023 01:31 zatic wrote:
Can I ask anyone disagreeing with my opinion what a realistic path to peace today could look like?
Putin dying and/or Russia imploding, and their full retreat out to pre-2014 borders as they get busy trying to rebuild their own country. It's not an entirely unlikely scenario in a not too distant future, due to all the sanctions wrecking havoc on the Russian economy atm. But as Zelenskyy himself has pointed out, peace talks doesn't happen while Putin is in charge. He has too much pride to lose
|
United States42271 Posts
You’re not getting his point, you’re describing one side decisively losing. His point is that since the annexation there is no reasonable compromise that can be struck that both sides can live with. Kherson is, to Russia, legally a part of its territory. The people there are Russians (albeit Russians they like to kill then gloat about it). Backing down from that would take a serious defeat, they would have to essentially say that Ukraine had conquered part of Russia.
Meanwhile Ukraine can’t cede this territory because in the real world it is Ukraine, in law, in observable fact, in spirit. Ceding it would open the door to ceding anything, there is no nation that could make such a bargain when the means to fight existed.
There is nothing to discuss, no peace possible. Through annexation Putin has burned his ships, there is no path backwards, only pressing forwards to total victory or annihilation.
Obviously if one side loses there can be surrender but surrender isn’t what is meant in terms of a peace settlement. There is nothing that could be tolerable to both sides, continued violence is at this time preferable to any peace the other side may offer.
|
Large explosion reported in Sevastopol Crimea. Done via drone apparently.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
