Ukraine and Russia

[spot]

Well, they arrived, they had there several hours together, they said nothing to the press, no doubt they came to an understanding on where things would go next.

Nothing was documented for the public, no questions were allowed from reporters, polite comments were made by both parties. I'm almost impressed they can have given so little out. That was almost Presidential, we've never seen that before. One term and two hundred days and President Trump finally gets a day right.

Here we are:

As Putin spoke, Trump stood in silence. It was several minutes before the Russian president mentioned what he called the "situation in Ukraine" – ostensibly the catalyst for the summit. When he did, it was to state that although an unspecified "agreement" had been reached, the "root causes" of the conflict had to be eliminated before peace could be achieved.

The phrase will have set off alarm bells in Kyiv and beyond. Since the start of the war it has become shorthand for a series of intractable and maximalist demands that Putin says stand in the way of a ceasefire.

They include recognition of Russian sovereignty over the Ukrainian regions of Crimea, Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia and Kherson as well as Ukraine agreeing to demilitarisation, neutrality, no foreign military involvement and new elections. Essentially, they amount to capitulation – unacceptable to Kyiv, but clearly – even after three-and-a-half years of bloody conflict – still paramount to Moscow.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c4gj9er0x0zo

[spot]

What do we expect?

As a final settlement, what we said here at Easter. The Russian-majority-speaking Oblasts to become a part of Russia - that's Donetsk, Luhansk and Crimea.

Putin told Trump that in exchange for Donetsk and Luhansk, he would halt further advances and freeze the frontline in the southern Ukrainian region of Kherson and Zaporizhzhia, where Russian forces occupy significant areas.

[...] Zelensky said in a statement after his conversations with Trump and the European leaders: “The positions are clear. A real peace must be achieved, one that will be lasting, not just another pause between Russian invasions. Killings must stop as soon as possible, the fire must cease both on the battlefield and in the sky, as well as against our port infrastructure. All Ukrainian prisoners of war and civilians must be released, and the children abducted by Russia must be returned.”

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/202 ... bas-region

So there's a slight wiggle adjustment, you pull all the way out of the two Russia-speaking majority zones and we'll pull right out of the other two part-occupied Ukraine-majority areas. But it's close.

[spot]

Today's papers are nonsensing about Putin prepares nuclear-delivery missiles as warning about Kiev's upcoming decision.

It's a test flight of a new hypersonic cruise missile delivery system. If it works then it works but it's not a system in an inventory, it's a test article in a series of tests preparatory to any possible start to manufacture, much less deployment. This is a system which might become operational in the 2030s.The actual preparations for this test must have been in hand for most of the year, and the Alaska meeting didn't exist until the start of the month.

I have little idea why storms in a teacup are allowed to become news in the first place.

[spot]

Here we are, before the kickoff today in Washington, this is what happened the last time there was a commitment to Ukraine's independence:

"The World and Japan" Database (Project Leader: TANAKA Akihiko)
Database of Japanese Politics and International Relations
National Graduate Institute for Policy Studies (GRIPS); Institute for Advanced Studies on Asia (IASA), The University of Tokyo
[Title] Memorandum on security assurances in connection with Ukraine’s accession to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons (Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances)

[Place] Budapest
[Date] December 15, 1994
[Source] United Nations Treaty Collection
[Notes]
[Full text]

Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America,

Welcoming the accession of Ukraine to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons as a non-nuclear-weapon State,

Taking into account the commitment of Ukraine to eliminate all nuclear weapons from its territory within a specified period of time,

Noting the changes in the world-wide security situation, including the end of the Cold War, which have brought about conditions for deep reductions in nuclear forces.

Confirm the following:

1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the Independence and Sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

2. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their obligation to refrain from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of Ukraine, and that none of their weapons will ever be used against Ukraine except in self-defense or otherwise in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations.

3. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to refrain from economic coercion designed to subordinate to their own interest the exercise by Ukraine of the rights inherent in its sovereignty and thus to secure advantages of any kind.

4. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a nonnuclear-weapon State Party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in which nuclear weapons are used.

5. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm, in the case of the Ukraine, their commitment not to use nuclear weapons against any non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, except in the case of an attack on themselves, their territories or dependent territories, their armed forces, or their allies, by such a state in association or alliance with a nuclear weapon state.

6. Ukraine, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America will consult in the event a situation arises which raises a question concerning these commitments.

This Memorandum will become applicable upon signature.

Signed in four copies having equal validity in the English, Russian and Ukrainian languages.

https://worldjpn.net/documents/texts/mt ... 5.O1E.html

Because they're talking about doing that again despite nobody lifting a finger this first time round.

Which is yet more of a lie, I reckon, if the first just got ignored when the going got a little rough.

[spot]

Because they're talking about doing that again despite nobody lifting a finger this first time round.

Which is yet more of a lie, I reckon, if the first just got ignored when the going got a little rough.

And here it is:

What does history tell us?

We have been here before. In 1994 Kyiv agreed to give up its nuclear weapons in exchange for international security assurances. Under the terms of the Budapest memorandum the US, Russia, the UK, China and France said they would ensure Ukraine’s “territorial integrity” and “political independence”. And to “refrain from the use and threat of force”.

At the time Ukrainian politicians thought giving up the country’s nuclear arsenal left it open to Russian attack. The Clinton administration was insistent. In May 1997 Russia’s president Boris Yeltsin signed a friendship treaty with his Ukrainian counterpart, Leonid Kuchma. Russia recognised Ukraine’s post-Soviet borders. As part of the deal, Kyiv gave Moscow most of its navy, and leased the Crimean port of Sevastopol to the Russians for 20 years.

Neither agreement stopped Russian aggression. In 2014 the Kremlin used its troops stationed in Crimea to seize and annex the peninsula. Putin now says the whole of Ukraine is “historical Russia”. Ukraine’s experience of betrayal – with late 20th-century pledges proving to be worthless – means it will want better guarantees this time.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2025/ ... peace-deal

Tosh. If I were the Ukraine government I'd sue the lot of them for breach of contract and demand the nukes back. Why would anyone be so simple-minded as to let the same guarantors do it again a second time?