this post was submitted on 02 Jun 2023
2 points (100.0% liked)

World News

32045 readers
773 users here now

News from around the world!

Rules:

founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
 

“We believe the prerequisite for meaningful diplomacy and real peace is a stronger Ukraine, capable of deterring and defending against any future aggression,” Blinken said in a speech in Finland, which recently became NATO’s newest member and shares a long border with Russia.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (7 children)

While I am at it, The PRC has been trying for months to broker peace and has Russia at the table, why doesn't the US let Ukraine go to the table and negotiate, The United States has no right to be king of the world and has no right to be setting any terms for these talks.

[–] pleasemakesense@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (6 children)

It's very ironic how you are fine with china's involvement but not the US'

[–] ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (5 children)

The difference is china is merely acting as a medator, a nutural 3rd party whos job is to 1) host the negotiations 2) help the 2 sides truly hear each other and come to a compromise. If you listen to what China says about this and how they interact with Russia its in keeping with this role, that all they want is to see the fighting end. The United States by dictating terms has forfitted there ability to fufill this role, China however has sugested nor offered any terms, only a table to talk at. If you really don't want China it doesn't have to be China, but they already have one side seated, and I would like to hear who else you would propose?

[–] pleasemakesense@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So if the war end right now would that mean Russia would withdraw it's troops from Ukraine? No it wouldn't, so implicitly engaging in peace talks while Russia holds territory in Ukraine would mean conceding territory. Why would china want that? Isn't that meddling in the war?

[–] ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

They say they want peace and are willing to hold talks, I am mot sure what your getting at, in no war ever has the beginning of peace talks been the cesation of the war, and how the war ends is determined by said peace talks, talks that of right bow are not happening.

Now if you are trying to argue that the mere act of trying to hold peace talks or offering to hold peace talks, or holding peace talks is taking a position in the war? I dont think we need to inform Switzerland that they have infact never been nutral in any conflict they mediated.

As for what China wants, they have stated all they want is peace many times, they do not have a horse in the race on who gets what, that makes them the ideal mediators.

[–] pleasemakesense@lemmy.ml -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So what is the point of having peace talks if not the cessation of war?

[–] ComradePupIvy@lemmygrad.ml 1 points 1 year ago

The end goal is the cessation of the war, but the fighting contenues untill a cesefire or peace treaty is negotiated and signed, and the war contenues untill said treaty is signed. A sad truth of war is while diplomats are haggling over words on a page the fighting still contues, the war ends when the negotiations end.

load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)
load more comments (3 replies)