A decision to negotiate over the heads of the Ukrainians would reveal just how Trump sees Ukraine and Europe.
  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
    0·
    4 days ago

    Ahh. The old hasbara strategy of pretending nothing happened before that. Nice.

    I don’t know what that means tbh.

    Link

    The article and the relevant section from Wikipedia both describe how the talks failed on multiple issues, with one part being the refusal of giving security guarantees.

    Speaking further and explaining Kyiv’s refusal to accept the proposal, Arakhamia said that it would require a constitutional change, given that Ukraine’s Constitution states its intention to become a NATO member.

    Additionally, he emphasized a lack of trust in the Russian position.

    “There is no, and there was no, trust in the Russians that they would do it. That could only be done if there were security guarantees.”

    Arahamiya clarified that signing such an agreement without guarantees would have left Ukraine vulnerable to a second incursion.

    • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
      0·
      4 days ago

      So you believe the Ukrainian officials confirming this are lying?

      The Wikipedia entries are maintained by western propagandists. I wouldn’t put much faith in the credibility.

      • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
        0·
        4 days ago

        I don’t know who Ukrainian official you mean, other than that I quoted same person as your article did (Arahamiya/Arakhamia). In those links he isn’t confirming your take that “Boris Johnson (of all people) saying “shouldn’t sign anything with them at all – and let’s just fight” was their “Western handlers ordering them to fight””.

        The Wikipedia article has links to their sources (news articles) who come back to the same things said in your linked article (from The European Conservative). It’s just that the article you linked gives a lot more weight (an outright claim of being forced) to the Boris episode than many other sources or from what I’ve seen, Arahamiya/Arakhamia (their source) does himself. He doesn’t seem to have said what the title of your article (about being forced) claims. Or if he did, they didn’t quote that part.

        • surph_ninja@lemmy.world
          0·
          4 days ago

          The Wikipedia entry referencing news articles doesn’t mean much if the articles themselves are pushing western propaganda. Especially considering how many news agencies are (or were) on the payroll of USAID, I wouldn’t expect to see them challenge the NATO narrative.

          Giving more weight to Wikipedia articles than Ukrainian officials is definitely… an interesting choice.

          • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
            0·
            4 days ago

            They’re all referencing the same interview and the same quotes from the same person… None of them seems to disagree on what he said. He just literally doesn’t in any of the quoted parts in any of the articles linked claim or confirm what your news article claimed it confirms. That’s the difference.

            Hell, you linked to The European Conservative which is an outright even in the name politically biased news source. But it’s the same quotes on all of them, so that part doesn’t matter since the actual interview is there.

              • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                0·
                4 days ago

                >Doesn’t actually address any of the points mentioned

                >Drops in a 26 minute video

                >“Just watch this bro”

                Fucking bravo.

                • AntiOutsideAktion@lemmy.mlEnglish
                  0·
                  3 days ago

                  Bro you just expect me to look at a primary source after I copy and pasted a wikipedia article? how do you think internet arguments work??

                  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                    0·
                    3 days ago

                    You know Wikipedia has their sources in these things [1] and it links to the actual source. Wikipedia in itself isn’t the source. And the source for all of them (including the other guy’s news article) was the exact same interview.

                    how do you think internet arguments work??

                    Definitely not good form to not make any points, but just drop a link to a 26 min video. It’s the same as saying source: a whole book. You make the argument and cite the parts you’re using for your argument. It’s sorta internet arguments 101.

                  • Lumbardo@reddthat.comEnglish
                    0·
                    4 days ago

                    Why are you just throwing links? You should at least make an attempt to quote your sources so you don’t leave people here reading erroneous information. @Kusimulkku at least gave you the courtesy of doing that.

                  • Kusimulkku@lemm.ee
                    0·
                    4 days ago

                    Article is better, but even better would be if you quoted a part that’s actually relevant to whatever point you’re trying to make. And perhaps even stated what point you’re trying to make.

                    If this is still about Ukrainians being “western handlers ordered them to keep fighting”, your linked article doesn’t give you much help:

                    U.K. Prime Minister Boris Johnson, following in the tradition of British anti-Russian war-mongering dating back to the Crimean War (1853-6), actually flew to Kiev to warn Zelensky against neutrality and the importance of Ukraine defeating Russia on the battlefield.

                    So much so for Western handlers ordering them to keep fighting. Wah-wah.