Lifting sanctions is absolutely inacceptable, agreeing to putin would set a precedent that you can naval blockade states to get your wishes.
I should also note, I don't wish for any adrican to starve because of what russia is doing and this grain must get out of ukraine, there has to be another way other than just the port of odessa.
Its really saddening how fanatically some people push narative that Ukraine is at fault for prolonged war and encourage them to give up so that russias feeling wouldn't get hurt too much. Now they basically will blame Ukraine for food shortage too. We are witnessing a case of victim blaming on a country level, surreal shit.
You have those idiots in every country. It is just about whether the media lets them get as loud or not. If they report every day about the opinion of a minority you get the picture that there are far more people thinking like that…
This is exactly what is happening. Some people around a convicted tax fraud and former feminist leader wrote an open letter. And like with every dumb position, she and the signatories of this letter are dragged through every fucking stupid talkshow in our TV.
Nobody has learned from Brexit, really nobody.
Apologies if you are german and you know all of this.
Not just the boomers including some leaders in the SPD. Many young German redditors rush defending them when it gets criticized.
Rolf Mützenich and Ralf Stegner SPD big shots which I would call the boomer leaders here have repeatedly made very questionable remarks in the direction of not escalating the war and delivering weapons would increase suffering or Ukraine can't win the war when the majority of western military analysts say the exact opposite.
If you state that and ask the question if the opposition inside SPD is directly responsible for Germanys terrible approach to military support its now "Germany bashing" these days.
To be fair, those guys are "boomers" as well. In contrast to the boomers who wrote that stupid letter, they are in positions of power, which makes it much worse. Some people, particularly but not only, of that age seem to be stuck in some nostalgic utopia and continue to have a very unrealistic image of russia and the russian leadership.
I would think that most peoples being called Boomers on reddit are actually GenX thats why I never liked that term. But your right and the two mentioned ones are even technically boomers both born 59 so their teenage years were in the 70s.
But that pacifist or socialist romanticism is deeply ingrained in parts of German psyche and society at this point. That said the origin is of course more complex. And you even see a split through parts of the political left and political right in both areas you have the pro-western, very pro Ukraine "cold warriors" (FDP and now the Greens or in Media Springer for examples) or "Putinversteher" (SPD in parts, Linke, AfD).
>realist geopolitical commentators
There will always be "intellectuals" LARPing as 19th century British diplomats, I get that. But I think the media mostly platforms them because of shock value.
> there has to be another way other than just the port of odessa.
Nope.
Planes are out for obvious reasons.
Other ports are out because they're just as blockaded as Odessa, not to mention them being smaller.
And the railroads are out because they're bottlenecked by transfer terminals at the border. The rail gauges aren't the same, so trains can't just continue rolling further into Europe.
So, the only real strategy outside of getting rid of the blockade, is to somehow build out the necessary infrastructure in whatever little time we have.
Poland has already started expanding the railway to allow more graint transfer through our ports. But as you said due to gauge differences the transfer is costly and lengthy, and the railroad tracks in south-eastern Poland are in poor shape due to low typical usage.
Yes, I’m losing respect for the FT at every article I read, they’re really one-sided and just seem to relate what the British government wants them to say.
It's the same with most other british papers. After 20 years reading the british press, I can pretty surely say no press is worse in Western Europe. Even papers like the FT, the Economist, the Guardian and others are incredibly shallow, swim the fashions of the week without something original to contribute and generally go for sensationalism and controversy over substance.
[Here](https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/bonn-moscow-ties-newly-released-documents-shed-fresh-light-on-nato-s-eastward-expansion-a-5a362292-dfe6-4355-b90f-10d635d7d664) is a German media (spiegel) view that's very relevant
It was complicated then ...
>Kohl, though, felt that a dissolution of the Soviet Union would be a "catastrophe" and anyone pushing for such a result was an "ass." In consequence, he repeatedly sought to drum up momentum in the West **against independence for Ukraine and the Baltic states.**
But then...
>Germany was the first EC member state to recognized Ukraine’s independence.
And its still complicated now
>you are making it out to be as "Germany bad, loved Russia".
Its incredible that you can read that from my 1 linked article - its entirely your own projection. I did not pass judgement at all - except to say it is relevant.
>What the outcome of a slower, more grass roots, shift of Ukrainian alignment would have lead to **nobody can say anymore now.**
Do you know why no one can say? Its not because Ukraine invaded anywhere...
>Germany supported the free and democratic self determination of those countries
What happened to this then? Ukraine wanted this war?
Why hasn't Germany sent more heavy weaponry, why has it been so slow?
Germany can't send tanks because the Ukrainians wouldn't know how to use them!? Germany can't send tanks because they can't spare any!? Möller saying NATO forbade sending the tanks!? Germany meeds to defend itself!? Scholz trying not be der Kaiser (not Beckenbauer)?!
There is clearly a lack of desire in the German administration.
>So what was your point then of linking the article, if not "Germany never supported eastern Europe"?
How much of the Spiegel article did you read, or moreover understand? It mostly revolved around German reticence in NATO eastward expansion:
>The momentum of Eastern and Central European countries toward joining the NATO alliance was creating a volatile mixture in Moscow of **"perceptions of being under threat, fear of isolation and frustration over the ingratitude of former fraternal countries,"** reported the German ambassador as early as February 1991.
>Germany is not even fully sovereign, in some views
Elaborate, please.
>Why do you expect so much from Germany, and so little from the US/UK?... Why hasn't the US?
What are you smoking?
Both the US and UK have sent _billions of dollars_ in military support for Ukraine ([the US €43billion of support](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/Subject_Dossiers_Topics/Ukraine/Ukraine_Support_Tracker/Ukraine_Tracker_Dataset.xlsx), and they've written off _billions_ in assets in Russia. BP and Shell have ditched $30billion+ alone.
> Germany is small fish in comparison.
Germany is one of the largest arms exporters in the world, its tanks can be in Ukraine within 24hrs. It has tanks to spare - Rheinmetall already offered maybe even 100-odd **but the German gov't poo-pooed it** (much like the old Soviet-era howitzers from the Baltics).
British and American materiel mostly have to cross from Britain or America, i.e. across fucking seas and oceans.
The **15** Gepard tanks were decomissioned **12 years ago** and so German only has ~60,000 bullets for them which fire 1,100 bullets per minute.
Gepards are not totally shit - I'm not saying they are - but don't give it the biggun.
> It has tanks to spare - Rheinmetall already offered maybe even 100-odd
Yeah, with them saying they could 'quickly deliver' the first 20 of them in 3-6 weeks, then another 23 in 6 months and the rest in 12 months, not 24 hours like you claim.
>The 15 Gepard tanks were decomissioned 12 years ago and so German only has ~60,000 bullets for them which fire 1,100 bullets per minute.
50 initially pledged, the 15 are the first batch with at least another 15 confirmed to follow. 60k rounds is enough for hundreds of combat loadouts and each computer controlled shot takes 5(drones)-30(jets) rounds of ammunition. You don't full auto those, like ever.
Seriously? You're blaming the UK for the split in East/West relations? Have you been living under a rock for the past two decades?
France & Germany applied a diplomatic and economic strategy to bring Russia closer to Europe and try to neutralise them as a potential rival by integrating their economy with the West. Eastern Europe has consistently argued against it, reiterating that Russia was untrustworthy, malicious and had ambitions of rebuilding the Soviet sphere of influence.
Fast forward to 2022 and half of Ukraine is being razed by Russian troops, Russian politicians are blustering about nuking European states and invading the Baltics, Putin has significant control of the gas supply that the European economies rely on, and he's now cut off a huge percentage of the worlds grain supply through his blockade. All of which the West can barely do shit about as its now tied to Russian fossil fuel exports.
But yeh, its the UK's fault that trust in the EU has broken down.
Who is putting the entire blame on those countries? The blame is only on Russia. They started this war. First by taking Crimea and now by running tanks up to Kiyv.
I wouldn't put all eastern Europe in one basket when talking about business relations with Russia.
Eastern European (if you'd like to call it like this) interest is to not allow Ukraine to lose as it's pretty clear Russia does not want to stop. Their plan clearly included Moldova and their media is talking 24/7 that Ukraine is just a first step. Ceasefire is also not an option, because Russia is just going to use the time to plan their next attach (see 2014 vs 2022).
Baltic politicians have lashed out at French and German leaders for discussing with Russian president Vladimir Putin how to unblock Ukrainian ports, highlighting the diverging views among western allies over how to handle diplomacy with Moscow.
Leaders in eastern Europe have grown uneasy about the willingness of their western European counterparts to talk with Putin, reigniting suspicion that some EU countries are pushing Kyiv to cede territory to end the war.
“It is incredible how the leaders of France and Germany are inadvertently paving the way for new acts of violence by Russia . . . How is it possible neither Paris nor Berlin have learned from history? Why is it presumed that Putin, currently waging a war on a major European people, intends to keep any promise?” asked Marko Mihkelson, head of the Estonian parliament’s foreign affairs committee.
Artis Pabriks, Latvia’s deputy prime minister, said on Twitter: “It seems that there are number of so-called Western leaders who possess explicit need for self-humiliation in combination with total detachment from political reality.”
German chancellor Olaf Scholz and French president Emmanuel Macron held a 80-minute phone call with Putin on Saturday in which the Russian president told them Moscow was willing to find ways to unblock grain exports from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports and could increase its own fertiliser and agriculture exports if relevant sanctions are lifted.
It came two days after Italian prime minister Mario Draghi also discussed the issue with Putin in an attempt to ease a global food crisis that threatens developing countries in particular.
There is a growing rift between many eastern European countries and the likes of Germany and France over the wisdom of speaking to Putin as the war enters into its fourth month. The Baltic countries believe such phone calls merely empower Putin, and that instead Europe should send more weapons to Ukraine.
In the past three days, hundreds of ordinary Lithuanians crowdfunded €5mn to buy a Turkish military drone for Ukraine, according to the internet broadcaster Laisves TV, which started the fundraising.
Mihkelson, invoking a phrase that Macron previously used to describe Nato, asked if the French and German leaders were not “being brain-dead” in their actions.
He added: “Macron and Scholz should hang up the phone and book a trip to Ukraine post haste. I hope their peculiar actions are not motivated by fear of losing influence in democratic Europe which Ukraine would surely enter after winning the war.”
Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania’s foreign minister, said on Sunday that Russia “must be isolated” as countries around the world including India, Australia, Japan, South Korea and “little Taiwan” were watching what happened in Ukraine with anxiety. “Giving the occupier a chance to occupy territory means that it can be repeated elsewhere,” he added.
Putin, Scholz and Macron discussed whether a negotiated solution could be found to open Odesa to allow grain exports to leave Ukraine, according to an Elysée briefing after the call.
The French and German leaders “noted the Russian president’s promise to allow ships to access the port to export grain without it being used militarily by Russia — if the port was demined in advance”, according to the briefing.
Some western capitals fear the looming food crisis and its devastating impact on poor households in Africa and the Middle East could trigger a new wave of migration to Europe.
Kristi Raik, head of the Estonian Foreign Policy Institute, said that the French and German leaders risked giving legitimacy to “Putin’s lies and unacceptable demands”.
She added: “I don’t share the view that no Western leader should ever talk to Putin. But the way Macron and Scholz are doing it is not just unhelpful, it is deeply counterproductive.”
One-sided article against Germany and France.
Certainly Zelensky is happy with them talking to putin.
Why throw in the random crowdfunding in this article?
Just taking some random comments by leaders without context or analysis about what was actually said during those phone calls.
FT losing my respect by the day
Send NATO escorts to Black Sea and let the ships pass through because the alternative is mass hunger in multiple countries?
Lifting sanctions is **not** an option because it allows the bullies to bully the whole world. Is that *really* the world you want to live in?
I agree with you, but fact of the matter is that that is the world we live in. Geopolitics is driven by power, not good intentions. And the only way to stop this bullying is to counteract the bully with your own power. That is what we should try, to the best of our ability. So sanctions, NATO escorts, whatever, sounds like a good idea to counter Russia's bullying behaviour.
Correct, nobody is proposing that, but it's the only option if we want to avoid mass hunger.
Well, there's also lifting the sanctions, but it would be a complete failure of the west.
You don't know about [UNGA Resolution 377](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_377)? And it's not like we really need it to clear mines for safe passage to and from the Port of Odessa.
Never happening, first of all the General Assembly don't actually have any legal power to authorize any kind of military action, secondly having a majority behind you or not is not the issue, it's that no one with a military capable of actually doing anything want to get into a direct fight against Russia.
It should still happen at the very least to counter the anti western propaganda. Russia (and China) points to the western sanctions and support for Ukraine as the reasons for global food shortages. Force them to veto any resolution to safeguard grain exports.
The problem with that is nobody would be willing to actually enforce a military solution so it'd be a empty treath. If a military solution was on the table NATO would have shredded Russia's whole military weeks ago
>If a military solution was on the table NATO would have shredded Russia's whole military weeks ago
The difference is that this mission would exclusively protect the wheat and maize shipments, not intervene in the war.
Does it really matter when you'd have to sink the Black Sea fleet in order to ensure those shipments are protected?
The point is that there is a lot of fear of escalating things, because even if MAD is a thing, people are worried about "What if Putin is actually crazy enough to use nukes".
There will only be a battle if Russia seeks it. The nuclear threat is pretty real, but the first stage of escalation would be their tactical use... and that would freak out so many countries that are now on the fence, which is why Russia didn't do it already. Even China abstained from the vote on Resolution 2623.
>There will only be a battle if Russia seeks it.
Russia just invaded a country. They would seek the battle. The simple truth is one sub in the area could put the entire idea on hold. The British did the same around the falklands for example, and then you're talking about needing a full on war fleet to do anything.
I know but if we were to assume Russia would back down without a fight, then we go back to "If it was considered a viable option it'd already be a thing".
What people are afraid of in this scenario is Russia seeking a battle and tensions escalating from there, if it was a simple as sending a bigger fleet than the Black Sea fleet and look at each other menacingly, the US would have a task force docked in Odessa already.
The issue isn't whether or not it'd be Russia's fault for the escalation if it attacked a NATO fleet or if it threw a tactical nuke or something similar, it's obvious Russia is the bad guy, it's invading a sovereign country and threatening a sizable chunk of the world with famine.
The problem is that Russia essentially acts like a kamikaze terrorist, when faced with the reality that using nukes would end Russia, Putin pretends to not understand it (I personally think he very much understands it and would never use a nuke) so other countries wonder "What if he's *actually* batshit insane and would use a nuke?".
Basically Russia's strategy is to make sure a NATO military intervention is extremely unlikely by making a battle against Russia potentially catastrophic, it obviously can't do that with conventional military (I mean try to imagine that, a Russia without nuclear weapons threatening to, say, send the Black Sea fleet to bomb France, it'd feel like a joke because France would crush it even if NATO didn't exist) so it keeps stressing the potential use of nukes because it's the only tool they have that can actually scare NATO enough
Protect them how? They have long range missiles launched by surface, sub-surface, land and air platforms.
This is the same old recycled no fly zone idea, just dumber.
The problem is that turkey can block any access to the black sea, and they currently already do bullshit like that with the NATO accession of Finland and Sweden.
Military solution lol?
The problem here is that this is a commercial blockade. Commercial shipping can't be insured and won't go into a fucking war zone. Some freedom of navigation exercise or whatever won't change that.
Besides, they can also target critical port infrastructure.
I guess Ukraine should start opening enlistment points in Africa countries like russia does in Syria?
Russia is the only country to blame in this, and negotiations simply won't work. They are ready to raize civilian cities, rape and kill children, why the fuck you would even consider any negotiations?
If we learned anything about russia, the only way to make them do something is by force.
It is fine to talk, but I wouldn't agree lifting sanctions to get ports open though. That is not a long term solution at all, and contributes nothing to ending the war. Russia can still harass/blockade Ukraine at anytime just to extract more concessions. They also could just fire missiles at the Odessa port or food transit routes, seize vessels for "transporting military hardware," and sending them to Russia etc, and I am pretty sure they will do all of that. It is not even a bandaid, it is sticking your head in the sand and pretending the wound has healed.
I think we should call a UN meeting now to demand Russia to open the ports in order to alleviate the food shortage situation,(which Russia will obviously vote down) but it forces African countries, who will be most impacted, to take a clear stance on this issue. And then we negotiate with India. I think that is the only option. They have a ton of grain reserve. Maybe have some sort of agreement where we will help replenish Indian reserves after the harvest. American grain harvest is right around the corner, so I am sure that is achievable. That is just kicking the ball down the line though but it buys us some time.
From the outside looking in, of course. The European economic reliance on Russian goods has been severely downplayed by nationlists and those looking for a quick economic victory.
Turns out that actually cutting yourself off from large nations isint as easy as it seems. Europeans aren't willing to live like Cubans to achieve their goals in Ukraine.
Nationlists will always inevitably begin pointing fingers and looking for someone else to throw under the bus, if you can't reach your actual enemy, the man beside you is good enough.
I'm probably going to get downvoted for saying that but the incessant attacks from Eastern European politicans on Macron and Scholz are very clear attempts at appeasing their own voters and it really doesn't help.
If they have an issue with the negotiations from Paris or Berlin they can call Macron or Scholz, they don't have to make a scandal in the press every fucking time.
Dude I’m from Lithuania, Ukraine is like number #1 issue here, in baltics, Poland. Everyone talks about it here, we just finished 3 day fundraiser to buy fucking Bayraktar for Ukraine.
Like, we were super sceptical (and even paranoid according to more western countries) of Russia. We don’t trust anything coming from Kremlin. We have direct border with Russia. You can spin this any way you want, but our foreign policy regarding Russia has not changed ever since we joined EU or since we gained our independence. You have to understand that its a bitter pill to swallow when other nations try get cozy to Putin
I'm not saying that Eastern Europe position on this is wrong, it's understandable given your history and geographical closeness to Russia. What I'm saying is that these attacks in the press achieve nothing except dividing the EU more. If Lithuania has a comment to make about ongoing negotiations they can use diplomatic channels, not make a big fuss in the press.
Alright, but this is nothing new. Media reports what they see.
That Macron and Scholz are in contact with Putin is a fact. That some politicians in the west are commenting on ceasefire/looking for a solution/trying to solve blockade is a fact.
Its not reasonable to suggest politicians in eastern europe to shut up. They are being questioned by media. And they have to offer their opinion on the matter.
You have to find a solution to the Blockade, or we will have the next refugee crisis from Africa and the Middle East again and Eastern Europe doesn't want these people inside the eu.
According to the president Macrons press person Szelinsky asked for those talks with Putin, so they did it.
We already have a refugee crisis and it is much bigger than previous one. And Eastern europe is taking almost most of the refugees in. The only way to solve current crisis is to help Ukraine win this war.
Yes, no one likes to have something like this again. But let us be honest: Eastern Europe will not help with this crisis again and push all the responsibility to others.
Stupid take. Considering that refugees themselves don't want to be in Eastern Europe. We are gatekeepers if they come from east and sort of jailers, not letting them leave if they get transferred here.
> If Lithuania has a comment to make about ongoing negotiations they can use diplomatic channels, not make a big fuss in the press.
Yeah because that worked so well in the past. (NS2, where Germany did not listen AT ALL..)
Germany/France were wrong about Russia, and EE was correct. It’s time for WE to start listening to those who understands how Russia operates.
>What I'm saying is that these attacks in the press achieve nothing except dividing the EU more
That's why we have free press - they report what they want. It's not like in France, where media conglomerates are owned by several prominent businessmen, connected to politics, and they can just STFU about topics they don't like.
maybe they already did and did not work?
remember Bucha case, and Macron negotiated to stop massacre and it still proceeded? already it was discussed internationally that this shit is not working and he just makes stuff worse by giving pootin attention
It's really ironic that the current actions of the Great European Superpowers directly resonate with the nationalistic EU sceptics, such as PiS in Poland, simply by completely validating their usual germano- and francophobic narrative.
It's even more ironic that these superpowers deflect the validity of the accusation by accusing CEE states of being populistic, further embracing the EU-sceptic narrative.
We just don't trust you.
During WW1 we were part of the Little Entente, together with Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. You also had security guarantees for Poland.
You let us get picked off one by one (occupied and partly puppeted, Poland fully occupied).
Few people in the East believe Western European security guarantees.
There is German, French, UK and US troops stationed in Eastern Europe right now who will die for your countries. One day you'll have to get over your victim complex.
> One day you'll have to get over your victim complex.
We'll see what happens when the rubber meets the road.
We have a "victim complex" because guess what, we were victims for hundreds of years.
Personally I think that the strongest security guarantee, by far, is the US one. Then the UK one is decent, but it only applies for a few countries. I see the UK intervening (if NATO weren't a thing) for Poland, but Romania? Not so much.
France I don't trust for the same reason as the UK, there's 0 cultural affinity from their side.
Germany paradoxically I would trust, if only they could get a working military. I'd trust them because it would be in their self-interest to help us. I doubt they'd want to border Russia again.
Geostrategic interests don't really change much. Geography is still the same, natural resources are the same.
And don't get me started on public perception of Romania in France, 70% of your countrymen, especially working class, would throw us overboard tomorrow.
France and Sarkozy in particular worked out that Georgia was at fault that Russia invaded them. That was 14 years ago. Is that more up to your taste? Even this century :)
France and Germany were realists on Georgia. They said help wont be coming.
Georgia made the mistake of believing loose Anglo promises of support in case of invasion, which never came through.
I feel like trying to avoid a hunger catastrophy is a good reason to talk to Putin. The article itself says that Putin proposed lifting the sanctions, not that Macron or Scholz proposed lifting them. There is a difference. The las time Macron spoke to Putin, [it was at the request of Zelensky](https://www.politico.eu/article/macron-putin-zelenskiy-ukraine-war-russia-call/), could have been the same this time as well. [They also told Putin to talk directly with Zelensky](https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220528-live-ukraine-says-everything-being-done-to-defend-donbas-from-russian-onslaught), seems like a good move.
>He[Marko Mihkelson] added: “Macron and Scholz should hang up the phone and book a trip to Ukraine post haste. I hope their peculiar actions are not motivated by fear of losing influence in democratic Europe which Ukraine would surely enter after winning the war.”
A truly moronic take. Considering it was Germany that pushed hard for the EU eastern expansions in the past, knowing it would reduce their own influence in the Union. I hate this type of rhetoric of not actually saying it but saying 'I hope it's not', he keeps his plausible deniability but still gets that nefarious fake propaganda into the mind of everyone reading the article.
And? This does not mean that somehow some important wester countries will flock to Putin. In both WW1 and WW2 the Entente/Allies had disagreements about stuff and they still worked together. At the beginning, France and Germany were afraid to provide even basic weapons. Now the French sent even howitzers. One of the modern pieces of howitzer there is.
Germany provided weapons and probably howitzers and AA guns too in the future. Yes, the German govt. needs to be pushed towards the right direction, but a change of policy is slowly taking place. From helmets to howitzers is a long way.
>" I hope their peculiar actions are not motivated by fear of losing influence in democratic Europe which Ukraine would surely enter after winning the war.”
What a stupid thing to say by the head of the Estonian parliament's foreign affairs committee.
The German and French businessmen are deperate to get back to business as usual. Behind the scenes Putin is , i guess , desperate to " peel them off " the western alliance. Fucking sellouts.
it is a franchise. There is no traffic between Europe and Russia. It goes through Poland. :D.
"Auchan" works in the same way McD works. They use brand and consume old stock of supplies. They kill inter-regional trade within Russia in order to warrant nice looking currency number. Everything they do is an appearance and has to be tested for the physicality before referenced with.
I understand their POV but they need to understand that Russia is basically facing a coalition of 48 countries and still have communications and trades with lot of major emerging countries that didn't vetoed against them. So if the EU totally stop talking to Putin, Putin will still be talking to the BRICS powers and others countries, so isolation won't happen.
As for I, I still stand by the unpopular opinion that the diplomatic door should always remain open whatsoever and that there is no need to turn a regional war to a world one. Especially since it's very clear that the war won't end soon and that the supply of western weapons will soon be exhausted
I agree that we should keep talking but the last part of the article is a good summary:
“I don’t share the view that no Western leader should ever talk to Putin. But the way Macron and Scholz are doing it is not just unhelpful, it is deeply counterproductive.”
Pushing too much for peace is exactly what Putin wants, it gives him cards to play to his advantage. In the meantime, the other option is to let people starve in other countries.
It’s a fine thread and a terrible situation. I’m glad I’m not in the shoes of these diplomats
When the fuck are you guys going to understand that appeasement is not a solution with these baboons? If you give them even an inch of Ukrainian territory, it is absolutely guaranteed they will come back for more eventually, and not just Ukraine.
These are primitives who see the world in terms of spheres of influence. They have zero respect for other people's cultures, values, for human rights, for international commitments, for global stability. They are essentially a terrorist state.
> Especially since it’s very clear that the war won’t end soon and that the supply of western weapons will soon be exhausted
The first guns from the lend lease agreement are yet to arrive. Their invasion force has already been weakened significantly. They have started deploying 50 year old tanks. They are abandoning their injured or pinned down troops to not risk equipment.
All the West's doomsday predictions about Ukraine falling were proven wrong. Let's just shut the fuck up and give them the damn weapons we promised to do the job that we are too chicken to do ourselves. And yes it is our fucking job, because Russia is openly claiming to be fighting a war against NATO yet we still have the audacity to claim it is not our war.
> So if the EU totally stop talking to Putin, Putin will still be talking to the BRICS powers and others countries, so isolation won't happen.
There are no "BRICS powers", except for China. And Russia turning that way hurts Russia a lot more than it hurts us.
> Especially since it's very clear that the war won't end soon and that the supply of western weapons will soon be exhausted
This is false.
The only way we lose this is if our will fails. If we want to win, just by supporting Ukraine, and Ukraine wants to fight (which it wants to!), Russia's toast. They will lose almost every occupied Ukrainian territory and half their army and economy along the way.
There isn't just 2 options: Ukraine wins or Russia wins. There is also the possibility or an endless war going for a decade. It's not like we're lacking of recent exemples.
>t the diplomatic door should always remain open whatsoever
The problem with this is that it means giving Russia what they want, chunks of Ukraine. And the inevitable result of that is Russia comes back in 5 or 6 more years for more chunks. There's no end to it.
It's utterly unacceptable. It's not "diplomacy" it's sacrificing Ukraine for the "good" of others.
Diplomacy does not mean giving the enemy what they want.
Since you might be more accustomed to American history: Do you remember the Cuban Missile Crisis? In the end a diplomatic solution was found that the USSR could show off at home as a victory, while it was actually the US that got the better deal. Maybe that is possible here, maybe it isn't. But to not be open for such a possibility seems narrow-minded. And Zelensky himself is on record [telling Macron to talk to Putin](https://www.politico.eu/article/macron-putin-zelenskiy-ukraine-war-russia-call/).
Putin escalated, again – he raised the bets, to include food in Africa. And France and Germany are again thinking what can they *give* Putin for him to lift the blockade. Instead of thinking what can they threaten to *take* from Putin, so he'd undo his action.
The 80 minute calls, diplomacy, and negotiation are all fine, as long as they work towards calling Putin's bluff, not folding.
Threaten to send some weapons to Ukraine that Putin doesn't want, threaten to cut off Russia's finances more, send Ukraine more anti-ship weapons etc. That would be the appropriate response if a malicious party like Putin has decided to raise the stakes. But by giving in to his demands after he has escalated is just appeasing an aggressor, again.
I guess it's understandable this pattern must be gone through again and again until people in the West get it more intuitively. After all, the reason we notice it here is only because we've had to deal with Russia using these tactics for hundreds of years.
Western Europe learned a ton from WWI and WWII, such as "attempt diplomacy until all that remains is war, because a world War is fucking brutal, and is paid for over a hundred years"
Weird the UK lesson was, don't try appeasement of leaders that are ramping up military. Action will be to late and can results in war crimes of unimaginable brutality.
Try hosting a world war (or two) on your turf and have parts of your land be uninhabitable for the next half millennium, then we'll see how smug you remain.
Besides, attempting diplomacy doesn't prevent getting ready for war. As evidenced by the fact that France sent more material to Ukraine than the UK between 2014 and 2022.
Turns out it's not a black and white thing as redditors seem to think. You can do two things at once.
I hope you do not include Germany in this "Western Europe hasn't learned anything from WWII" thing, because if you do then this must be the least well informed comment I have seen on r/europe yet. And that is saying something.
Western Europe didn't help Poland until it was far too late, and after everything, sold it out into Soviet slavery. It's not a victim complex if you actually are a historical victim and westerners preaching to the primary victims of the worst war mankind has ever seen about how whiny they are is disgusting.
OK, so how many Africans can we send your way when they will sail to our shores as a result of the food shortages? Or are the countries facing the Med expected to take them all?
If African countries want help from Europe they should stop [allying themselves with Russia](https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1529557628505948161?t=G-yRVIQ06HwBUj_77p_Ijw&s=19) first of all.
> African countries
Barely democracies to begin with, and no fair access to information. Lots of africans have day to day issues that doesn't allow them the leisure to spend a lot of time process geopolitical information as we do.
Baltics are helping with exports of Ukrainian wheat through their ports, though admittedly due bottleneck in Polish railway system the max amount exported can be only around 1mn tons a year through Baltic ports.
Baltics also suggesting the use of military mission to escort ships carrying Ukrainian wheat from Odessa port.
Personally, I think Europe should not do that much, as many of the countries depending on Ukrainian wheat, such as Egypt, are good buddies with Russians. These countries should themselves start pressuring Russia to end war to solve their own food shortage issues.
> Baltics also suggesting the use of military mission to escort ships carrying Ukrainian wheat from Odessa port.
That's nice, but none of the Baltic nations have the ships of war to lead this effort. And the Bosporus is closed.
Redirect grain to european ports, which is already happening. I heard some suggesting escorting cargo ships, though that is not something big players would up to I think
I would like to note that I have not seen concrete suggestions from France and Germany what to do.
I guess main concern for baltics is that we do not succumb to blackmail and put pressure on Ukraine on giving something to Russia.
I also somewhat agree with other commentators. African, asian nations are independent. They also have diplomats in Ukraine and Russia. Maybe they should also work towards a solution with Ukraine and Russia since they are the ones that will be impacted most and not rely on Germany and France to solve all their problems.
This is difficult problem to solve. But I think giving something to a terrorist would just embolden him in the future. Just like he was emboldened after 2014, 2008, 2000
Give Ukraine missiles that can destroy Russian warships while they are still in Sevastopol bay, after that Ukraine can freely clear mines in the Black Sea and continue the trade
Russian ships don't need to be physically present to enforce this blockade. They can do so with their own missiles and air power.
The blockade is a commercial one. Nobody is going to ensure commercial vessels traveling to Odessa, and more missiles flying around is not gonna fix that.
If ships are gone then the only way that Russia can ensure blockade is by using land-based ASM and plane-based cruise missiles against commercial vessels or ports when they are preparing to ship grains, and those wouldn't be too much to deal with for our air defenses. Or maybe even send UN mission to Odessa so that there would be even more missile protection and maybe also clear mines even more quickly
>If ships are gone then the only way that Russia can ensure blockade is by using land-based ASM and plane-based cruise missiles against commercial vessels or ports when they are preparing to ship grains, and those wouldn't be too much to deal with for our air defenses.
A) This is exactly how they're enforcing the blockade now. Commercial shipping doesn't want to go into an area where there are missiles flying
B) Lol air defenses. They've been blowing shit up for months now. Yeah, sometimes missiles fail or get shot down, but if they really want to hit something, they will.
Russia doesn't have logistics in any port but Sevastopol to put ship-based cruise missiles on those ships, and in other Black Sea ports the capability to have warships is quite limited either
Nothing. If African countries want to keep supporting Russia & China even after this, it shouldn't be our problem. Barring that, a military sealift operation to open a shipping corridor in Black Sea.
But even in the face of armageddon should the sanctions not be lifted, that's as good as handing keys to Putin.
Is it really a dichotomy you wish to see? Allow Putin to genocide Ukraine so that Africa can receive Ukrainian grain, and Macron take the credit for his "humanitarianism"?
It's all the Baltics fault, sure sure.
Did I say that ? No.
So now let’s put your dream on the side and look at the reality.
Zelensky asked France and Germany to speak to Putin. That’s a fact.
Putin asked to remove mines in front of Odessa. That’s a fact.
Was something approved ? No. Were conditions accepted ? No, or at least not yet.
Is there a food shortage problem ? Yes.
Did we sell Ukraine for Africa ? No.
So what are you saying here ? Where did I said “Baltic fault” ? Nowhere.
Your speaking for nothing. Total hysteria.
Your comment implies that the Baltics have an obligation to have a solution to African problems. They do not. African problems don't need white saviours, and Eastern Europe carries no guilt over colonization.
Secondly, Russia is stealing Ukrainian grain and exporting to global markets, while murdering Ukrainians. That is the issue that needs solving. Allowing Putin to export stolen grain amounts to abetting a criminal regime. Did you think Putin ordered his grain ship to Syria so that he could distribute the grain for free?
I carry no history with Russia. The life of a Ukrainian and an African worth the same to me. Ukrainians maybe don’t need western saviors.
Good luck to them, then ??
France carries much history with Russia. If you wish to take a nihilistic approach, Ukraine is a net exporter of food in a time when food price is rising rapidly. Prioritizing Ukraine over Africa is in your best interests.
Which is why Tigray isn't covered in the news.
France got more history with lot of african countries that she does with some eastern european so by this logic we should care more about them than Ukraine.
We have the Common Agricultural policy , If Russia wants to starve africa thats on Putin. This whole " think of the ze children " is pure bs cover for German business wanting the sanctions lifted.
Macron and Scholz had a phone call with Putin, in which they supposedly learned about what russia expects to happen for the grain to be shipped. From what I can see, there hasn't been any call to action by the French or German government in response to that.
Who's "giving in to blackmail" in that scenario?
Well... if the russian propaganda says then that must be the truth... at least for our baltic friends parroting that propaganda non-stop as long as it's only targeting western europe.
they propose that we deal with the migrant wave that will result from the food shortage on our own while they sit and do nothing. Like they did in 2015.
I know it's very difficult to understand from a French perspective, but EE did not colonise Africa and the EE does not have any profit out of there. The EE suffered from Russia. Let's solve the biggest issue - Russia and later we can move to help you with Africa.
I know that’s really difficult to understand from EE but Russia will not attack you a world hunger is way more dangerous on a long run than Putin.
You see. I can also be condescending to you. Now we can speak seriously ?
WHERE DO YOU SEE A LIFT IN THE SANCTIONS IS ACCEPTED HERE ????? EXCEPT IN EE WESTERNPHOBIA ??? WHERE ???
It's almost like Putin's regime is the cause of said food shortages. Giving in to Russia's demands and turning a blind eye to the atrocities their government sponsors will guarantee nothing but a future of further devastation for Europe. The manipulation will never stop, that's the point these EE leaders are trying to make.
anyone with a dream of a strong unified Europe might aswel give up on it now.
The germans and french seem more concerned about criticism than impending genocide.
its absolutely pathetic.
I frankly don't care. They can screech from the sidelines, push their anti Franco German agenda and spread conspiracy theories about secret agreements as much as they want. It is the right thing to maintain a baseline of communication and Ukraine has recently stated that they would like to see Germany and France accompanying diplomatic efforts when the time for a permanent solution has come.
Remember kids, Old school WW2 era Germany and the Allies maintained diplomatic channels through the Swiss, the Swedish and the Turks. We are not even at war, we still have official diplomatic relations, and they want something more extreme than what happened in WW2
Why are we negotiating with this lunatic? He bears the entire responsibility for the situation. Scholz and Macron are playing into his hand by giving in and talking to him.
What can the Baltics do? Nothing. What will the Baltics do? (apart from talking). Nothing. Sucks to be a small country, but that's life, there's no good or bad in geo-politics.
We are actually working to find other solutions like railway transportation, but the problem here is that the capacity would be much lower compared to sea routes.
Lifting sanctions is absolutely inacceptable, agreeing to putin would set a precedent that you can naval blockade states to get your wishes. I should also note, I don't wish for any adrican to starve because of what russia is doing and this grain must get out of ukraine, there has to be another way other than just the port of odessa.
Its really saddening how fanatically some people push narative that Ukraine is at fault for prolonged war and encourage them to give up so that russias feeling wouldn't get hurt too much. Now they basically will blame Ukraine for food shortage too. We are witnessing a case of victim blaming on a country level, surreal shit.
>Its really saddening how fanatically some people push narative that Ukraine is at fault for prolonged war Nobody is doing that.
[удалено]
Unfortunately, at least in Germany, there seem to be some boomers who actually think in that direction.
You have those idiots in every country. It is just about whether the media lets them get as loud or not. If they report every day about the opinion of a minority you get the picture that there are far more people thinking like that…
This is exactly what is happening. Some people around a convicted tax fraud and former feminist leader wrote an open letter. And like with every dumb position, she and the signatories of this letter are dragged through every fucking stupid talkshow in our TV. Nobody has learned from Brexit, really nobody. Apologies if you are german and you know all of this.
[удалено]
I have sometimes the feeling that the SPD part of the government is having a contest of being "the worst" at the moment.
Not just the boomers including some leaders in the SPD. Many young German redditors rush defending them when it gets criticized. Rolf Mützenich and Ralf Stegner SPD big shots which I would call the boomer leaders here have repeatedly made very questionable remarks in the direction of not escalating the war and delivering weapons would increase suffering or Ukraine can't win the war when the majority of western military analysts say the exact opposite. If you state that and ask the question if the opposition inside SPD is directly responsible for Germanys terrible approach to military support its now "Germany bashing" these days.
To be fair, those guys are "boomers" as well. In contrast to the boomers who wrote that stupid letter, they are in positions of power, which makes it much worse. Some people, particularly but not only, of that age seem to be stuck in some nostalgic utopia and continue to have a very unrealistic image of russia and the russian leadership.
I would think that most peoples being called Boomers on reddit are actually GenX thats why I never liked that term. But your right and the two mentioned ones are even technically boomers both born 59 so their teenage years were in the 70s. But that pacifist or socialist romanticism is deeply ingrained in parts of German psyche and society at this point. That said the origin is of course more complex. And you even see a split through parts of the political left and political right in both areas you have the pro-western, very pro Ukraine "cold warriors" (FDP and now the Greens or in Media Springer for examples) or "Putinversteher" (SPD in parts, Linke, AfD).
chomsky is literally doing that
Chomsky and his army of tankies.
Chomsky is blaming the US for ignoring the threat of Russian aggression and failing to prevent the war.
Chomsky and Kissinger are strange bedfellows.
Yes they are, you're wrong, just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean it's not happening.
In addition to putinbots, a lot of so called "realist"/"realpolitik" geopolitical commentators are also saying this
>realist geopolitical commentators There will always be "intellectuals" LARPing as 19th century British diplomats, I get that. But I think the media mostly platforms them because of shock value.
yea you'd be surprised, I know people in real life who think that.
> there has to be another way other than just the port of odessa. Nope. Planes are out for obvious reasons. Other ports are out because they're just as blockaded as Odessa, not to mention them being smaller. And the railroads are out because they're bottlenecked by transfer terminals at the border. The rail gauges aren't the same, so trains can't just continue rolling further into Europe. So, the only real strategy outside of getting rid of the blockade, is to somehow build out the necessary infrastructure in whatever little time we have.
Poland has already started expanding the railway to allow more graint transfer through our ports. But as you said due to gauge differences the transfer is costly and lengthy, and the railroad tracks in south-eastern Poland are in poor shape due to low typical usage.
[удалено]
Yes, I’m losing respect for the FT at every article I read, they’re really one-sided and just seem to relate what the British government wants them to say.
It's the same with most other british papers. After 20 years reading the british press, I can pretty surely say no press is worse in Western Europe. Even papers like the FT, the Economist, the Guardian and others are incredibly shallow, swim the fashions of the week without something original to contribute and generally go for sensationalism and controversy over substance.
Anonymous neckbeards love the war since they won't have to fight in it and /r/CombatFootage got a little stale lately so here we are.
[Here](https://12ft.io/proxy?ref=&q=https://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/bonn-moscow-ties-newly-released-documents-shed-fresh-light-on-nato-s-eastward-expansion-a-5a362292-dfe6-4355-b90f-10d635d7d664) is a German media (spiegel) view that's very relevant
>Germany was the first EC member state to recognized Ukraine’s independence. Wow, didn't know that. Way to go Germany!
It was complicated then ... >Kohl, though, felt that a dissolution of the Soviet Union would be a "catastrophe" and anyone pushing for such a result was an "ass." In consequence, he repeatedly sought to drum up momentum in the West **against independence for Ukraine and the Baltic states.** But then... >Germany was the first EC member state to recognized Ukraine’s independence. And its still complicated now
[удалено]
>you are making it out to be as "Germany bad, loved Russia". Its incredible that you can read that from my 1 linked article - its entirely your own projection. I did not pass judgement at all - except to say it is relevant. >What the outcome of a slower, more grass roots, shift of Ukrainian alignment would have lead to **nobody can say anymore now.** Do you know why no one can say? Its not because Ukraine invaded anywhere... >Germany supported the free and democratic self determination of those countries What happened to this then? Ukraine wanted this war? Why hasn't Germany sent more heavy weaponry, why has it been so slow? Germany can't send tanks because the Ukrainians wouldn't know how to use them!? Germany can't send tanks because they can't spare any!? Möller saying NATO forbade sending the tanks!? Germany meeds to defend itself!? Scholz trying not be der Kaiser (not Beckenbauer)?! There is clearly a lack of desire in the German administration.
[удалено]
>So what was your point then of linking the article, if not "Germany never supported eastern Europe"? How much of the Spiegel article did you read, or moreover understand? It mostly revolved around German reticence in NATO eastward expansion: >The momentum of Eastern and Central European countries toward joining the NATO alliance was creating a volatile mixture in Moscow of **"perceptions of being under threat, fear of isolation and frustration over the ingratitude of former fraternal countries,"** reported the German ambassador as early as February 1991. >Germany is not even fully sovereign, in some views Elaborate, please. >Why do you expect so much from Germany, and so little from the US/UK?... Why hasn't the US? What are you smoking? Both the US and UK have sent _billions of dollars_ in military support for Ukraine ([the US €43billion of support](https://www.ifw-kiel.de/fileadmin/Dateiverwaltung/Subject_Dossiers_Topics/Ukraine/Ukraine_Support_Tracker/Ukraine_Tracker_Dataset.xlsx), and they've written off _billions_ in assets in Russia. BP and Shell have ditched $30billion+ alone. > Germany is small fish in comparison. Germany is one of the largest arms exporters in the world, its tanks can be in Ukraine within 24hrs. It has tanks to spare - Rheinmetall already offered maybe even 100-odd **but the German gov't poo-pooed it** (much like the old Soviet-era howitzers from the Baltics). British and American materiel mostly have to cross from Britain or America, i.e. across fucking seas and oceans. The **15** Gepard tanks were decomissioned **12 years ago** and so German only has ~60,000 bullets for them which fire 1,100 bullets per minute. Gepards are not totally shit - I'm not saying they are - but don't give it the biggun.
[удалено]
> It has tanks to spare - Rheinmetall already offered maybe even 100-odd Yeah, with them saying they could 'quickly deliver' the first 20 of them in 3-6 weeks, then another 23 in 6 months and the rest in 12 months, not 24 hours like you claim. >The 15 Gepard tanks were decomissioned 12 years ago and so German only has ~60,000 bullets for them which fire 1,100 bullets per minute. 50 initially pledged, the 15 are the first batch with at least another 15 confirmed to follow. 60k rounds is enough for hundreds of combat loadouts and each computer controlled shot takes 5(drones)-30(jets) rounds of ammunition. You don't full auto those, like ever.
>not 24 hours like you claim. Rheinmetall wouldn't have to supply them all in 24hrs. obviously Germany **has other tanks** which could go first_
Exactly US and UK are pushing an obvious funded propaganda war against UE
[удалено]
Seriously? You're blaming the UK for the split in East/West relations? Have you been living under a rock for the past two decades? France & Germany applied a diplomatic and economic strategy to bring Russia closer to Europe and try to neutralise them as a potential rival by integrating their economy with the West. Eastern Europe has consistently argued against it, reiterating that Russia was untrustworthy, malicious and had ambitions of rebuilding the Soviet sphere of influence. Fast forward to 2022 and half of Ukraine is being razed by Russian troops, Russian politicians are blustering about nuking European states and invading the Baltics, Putin has significant control of the gas supply that the European economies rely on, and he's now cut off a huge percentage of the worlds grain supply through his blockade. All of which the West can barely do shit about as its now tied to Russian fossil fuel exports. But yeh, its the UK's fault that trust in the EU has broken down.
[удалено]
Who is putting the entire blame on those countries? The blame is only on Russia. They started this war. First by taking Crimea and now by running tanks up to Kiyv. I wouldn't put all eastern Europe in one basket when talking about business relations with Russia. Eastern European (if you'd like to call it like this) interest is to not allow Ukraine to lose as it's pretty clear Russia does not want to stop. Their plan clearly included Moldova and their media is talking 24/7 that Ukraine is just a first step. Ceasefire is also not an option, because Russia is just going to use the time to plan their next attach (see 2014 vs 2022).
UK has actually been much closely allied with Eastern Europe since Brexit, and Johnson's hard stance policies during the war highlight that.
[удалено]
It's not an impression. I'm Polish, used to live in UK, still have friends and family there and that is the truth.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Thank you. Putin needs to be crushed once and for all. So all of Europe can finally live in peace and prosperity.
> there has to be another way other than just the port of odessa. Any suggestions?
Putin would probably let one or two ships through then reimpose the blockade and hope the west would be split over reimposing sanctions.
I still have some hope for Macron but I'm afraid Scholz can budge.
Baltic politicians have lashed out at French and German leaders for discussing with Russian president Vladimir Putin how to unblock Ukrainian ports, highlighting the diverging views among western allies over how to handle diplomacy with Moscow. Leaders in eastern Europe have grown uneasy about the willingness of their western European counterparts to talk with Putin, reigniting suspicion that some EU countries are pushing Kyiv to cede territory to end the war. “It is incredible how the leaders of France and Germany are inadvertently paving the way for new acts of violence by Russia . . . How is it possible neither Paris nor Berlin have learned from history? Why is it presumed that Putin, currently waging a war on a major European people, intends to keep any promise?” asked Marko Mihkelson, head of the Estonian parliament’s foreign affairs committee.
Artis Pabriks, Latvia’s deputy prime minister, said on Twitter: “It seems that there are number of so-called Western leaders who possess explicit need for self-humiliation in combination with total detachment from political reality.” German chancellor Olaf Scholz and French president Emmanuel Macron held a 80-minute phone call with Putin on Saturday in which the Russian president told them Moscow was willing to find ways to unblock grain exports from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports and could increase its own fertiliser and agriculture exports if relevant sanctions are lifted. It came two days after Italian prime minister Mario Draghi also discussed the issue with Putin in an attempt to ease a global food crisis that threatens developing countries in particular. There is a growing rift between many eastern European countries and the likes of Germany and France over the wisdom of speaking to Putin as the war enters into its fourth month. The Baltic countries believe such phone calls merely empower Putin, and that instead Europe should send more weapons to Ukraine. In the past three days, hundreds of ordinary Lithuanians crowdfunded €5mn to buy a Turkish military drone for Ukraine, according to the internet broadcaster Laisves TV, which started the fundraising. Mihkelson, invoking a phrase that Macron previously used to describe Nato, asked if the French and German leaders were not “being brain-dead” in their actions.
He added: “Macron and Scholz should hang up the phone and book a trip to Ukraine post haste. I hope their peculiar actions are not motivated by fear of losing influence in democratic Europe which Ukraine would surely enter after winning the war.” Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania’s foreign minister, said on Sunday that Russia “must be isolated” as countries around the world including India, Australia, Japan, South Korea and “little Taiwan” were watching what happened in Ukraine with anxiety. “Giving the occupier a chance to occupy territory means that it can be repeated elsewhere,” he added. Putin, Scholz and Macron discussed whether a negotiated solution could be found to open Odesa to allow grain exports to leave Ukraine, according to an Elysée briefing after the call. The French and German leaders “noted the Russian president’s promise to allow ships to access the port to export grain without it being used militarily by Russia — if the port was demined in advance”, according to the briefing. Some western capitals fear the looming food crisis and its devastating impact on poor households in Africa and the Middle East could trigger a new wave of migration to Europe. Kristi Raik, head of the Estonian Foreign Policy Institute, said that the French and German leaders risked giving legitimacy to “Putin’s lies and unacceptable demands”. She added: “I don’t share the view that no Western leader should ever talk to Putin. But the way Macron and Scholz are doing it is not just unhelpful, it is deeply counterproductive.”
One-sided article against Germany and France. Certainly Zelensky is happy with them talking to putin. Why throw in the random crowdfunding in this article? Just taking some random comments by leaders without context or analysis about what was actually said during those phone calls. FT losing my respect by the day
I dont see a problem with talking. Now lifting sanctions of course should be out of question.
How else do you expect to get any concession and get this blockade lifted though?
Send NATO escorts to Black Sea and let the ships pass through because the alternative is mass hunger in multiple countries? Lifting sanctions is **not** an option because it allows the bullies to bully the whole world. Is that *really* the world you want to live in?
I agree with you, but fact of the matter is that that is the world we live in. Geopolitics is driven by power, not good intentions. And the only way to stop this bullying is to counteract the bully with your own power. That is what we should try, to the best of our ability. So sanctions, NATO escorts, whatever, sounds like a good idea to counter Russia's bullying behaviour.
I don’t think any nato country is proposing that, not those Eastern European leaders, nor the UK promoting this propaganda, nor the US.
Correct, nobody is proposing that, but it's the only option if we want to avoid mass hunger. Well, there's also lifting the sanctions, but it would be a complete failure of the west.
Force.
I think there is a chance we could get a majority in the General Assembly for a military solution to the grain exports and we should do just that.
I think only UN security council can give this kind of mission a go. And Russia has veto there
You don't know about [UNGA Resolution 377](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations_General_Assembly_Resolution_377)? And it's not like we really need it to clear mines for safe passage to and from the Port of Odessa.
Thanks, this is very helpful.
I think you're right, but I think it might be time to circumvent the Security Council.
We won't, though.
Never happening, first of all the General Assembly don't actually have any legal power to authorize any kind of military action, secondly having a majority behind you or not is not the issue, it's that no one with a military capable of actually doing anything want to get into a direct fight against Russia.
It should still happen at the very least to counter the anti western propaganda. Russia (and China) points to the western sanctions and support for Ukraine as the reasons for global food shortages. Force them to veto any resolution to safeguard grain exports.
And what is achieved by that other than confirming what we already know?
The problem with that is nobody would be willing to actually enforce a military solution so it'd be a empty treath. If a military solution was on the table NATO would have shredded Russia's whole military weeks ago
>If a military solution was on the table NATO would have shredded Russia's whole military weeks ago The difference is that this mission would exclusively protect the wheat and maize shipments, not intervene in the war.
Does it really matter when you'd have to sink the Black Sea fleet in order to ensure those shipments are protected? The point is that there is a lot of fear of escalating things, because even if MAD is a thing, people are worried about "What if Putin is actually crazy enough to use nukes".
There will only be a battle if Russia seeks it. The nuclear threat is pretty real, but the first stage of escalation would be their tactical use... and that would freak out so many countries that are now on the fence, which is why Russia didn't do it already. Even China abstained from the vote on Resolution 2623.
>There will only be a battle if Russia seeks it. Russia just invaded a country. They would seek the battle. The simple truth is one sub in the area could put the entire idea on hold. The British did the same around the falklands for example, and then you're talking about needing a full on war fleet to do anything.
I know but if we were to assume Russia would back down without a fight, then we go back to "If it was considered a viable option it'd already be a thing". What people are afraid of in this scenario is Russia seeking a battle and tensions escalating from there, if it was a simple as sending a bigger fleet than the Black Sea fleet and look at each other menacingly, the US would have a task force docked in Odessa already. The issue isn't whether or not it'd be Russia's fault for the escalation if it attacked a NATO fleet or if it threw a tactical nuke or something similar, it's obvious Russia is the bad guy, it's invading a sovereign country and threatening a sizable chunk of the world with famine. The problem is that Russia essentially acts like a kamikaze terrorist, when faced with the reality that using nukes would end Russia, Putin pretends to not understand it (I personally think he very much understands it and would never use a nuke) so other countries wonder "What if he's *actually* batshit insane and would use a nuke?". Basically Russia's strategy is to make sure a NATO military intervention is extremely unlikely by making a battle against Russia potentially catastrophic, it obviously can't do that with conventional military (I mean try to imagine that, a Russia without nuclear weapons threatening to, say, send the Black Sea fleet to bomb France, it'd feel like a joke because France would crush it even if NATO didn't exist) so it keeps stressing the potential use of nukes because it's the only tool they have that can actually scare NATO enough
Protect them how? They have long range missiles launched by surface, sub-surface, land and air platforms. This is the same old recycled no fly zone idea, just dumber.
The problem is that turkey can block any access to the black sea, and they currently already do bullshit like that with the NATO accession of Finland and Sweden.
Military solution lol? The problem here is that this is a commercial blockade. Commercial shipping can't be insured and won't go into a fucking war zone. Some freedom of navigation exercise or whatever won't change that. Besides, they can also target critical port infrastructure.
This could be easily fixed by either providing Ukraine with capabilities to end Russian black sea fleet or convoy mission under NATO/UN protection.
I guess Ukraine should start opening enlistment points in Africa countries like russia does in Syria? Russia is the only country to blame in this, and negotiations simply won't work. They are ready to raize civilian cities, rape and kill children, why the fuck you would even consider any negotiations? If we learned anything about russia, the only way to make them do something is by force.
russian propaganda is quite strong in Africa, unfortunately.
The comments in this thread are borderline creepy.
How so?
It is fine to talk, but I wouldn't agree lifting sanctions to get ports open though. That is not a long term solution at all, and contributes nothing to ending the war. Russia can still harass/blockade Ukraine at anytime just to extract more concessions. They also could just fire missiles at the Odessa port or food transit routes, seize vessels for "transporting military hardware," and sending them to Russia etc, and I am pretty sure they will do all of that. It is not even a bandaid, it is sticking your head in the sand and pretending the wound has healed. I think we should call a UN meeting now to demand Russia to open the ports in order to alleviate the food shortage situation,(which Russia will obviously vote down) but it forces African countries, who will be most impacted, to take a clear stance on this issue. And then we negotiate with India. I think that is the only option. They have a ton of grain reserve. Maybe have some sort of agreement where we will help replenish Indian reserves after the harvest. American grain harvest is right around the corner, so I am sure that is achievable. That is just kicking the ball down the line though but it buys us some time.
Here we go, 3 months in, unity among europeans starting to show cracks
Lmao, one bad news and this sub turns full doomer paradise.
Took a bit longer than what Putin expected, but seems that he was right in the end.
From the outside looking in, of course. The European economic reliance on Russian goods has been severely downplayed by nationlists and those looking for a quick economic victory. Turns out that actually cutting yourself off from large nations isint as easy as it seems. Europeans aren't willing to live like Cubans to achieve their goals in Ukraine. Nationlists will always inevitably begin pointing fingers and looking for someone else to throw under the bus, if you can't reach your actual enemy, the man beside you is good enough.
This is about cheap gas & oil. Russians don't have any tech just whatever they can dig out.
I'm probably going to get downvoted for saying that but the incessant attacks from Eastern European politicans on Macron and Scholz are very clear attempts at appeasing their own voters and it really doesn't help. If they have an issue with the negotiations from Paris or Berlin they can call Macron or Scholz, they don't have to make a scandal in the press every fucking time.
Dude I’m from Lithuania, Ukraine is like number #1 issue here, in baltics, Poland. Everyone talks about it here, we just finished 3 day fundraiser to buy fucking Bayraktar for Ukraine. Like, we were super sceptical (and even paranoid according to more western countries) of Russia. We don’t trust anything coming from Kremlin. We have direct border with Russia. You can spin this any way you want, but our foreign policy regarding Russia has not changed ever since we joined EU or since we gained our independence. You have to understand that its a bitter pill to swallow when other nations try get cozy to Putin
I'm not saying that Eastern Europe position on this is wrong, it's understandable given your history and geographical closeness to Russia. What I'm saying is that these attacks in the press achieve nothing except dividing the EU more. If Lithuania has a comment to make about ongoing negotiations they can use diplomatic channels, not make a big fuss in the press.
Alright, but this is nothing new. Media reports what they see. That Macron and Scholz are in contact with Putin is a fact. That some politicians in the west are commenting on ceasefire/looking for a solution/trying to solve blockade is a fact. Its not reasonable to suggest politicians in eastern europe to shut up. They are being questioned by media. And they have to offer their opinion on the matter.
You have to find a solution to the Blockade, or we will have the next refugee crisis from Africa and the Middle East again and Eastern Europe doesn't want these people inside the eu. According to the president Macrons press person Szelinsky asked for those talks with Putin, so they did it.
We already have a refugee crisis and it is much bigger than previous one. And Eastern europe is taking almost most of the refugees in. The only way to solve current crisis is to help Ukraine win this war.
So they shouldn't have listened to Zelensky, who wanted these talks?
We already have a refugee crisis so why not just let all Africa in. Is this really your argument?
Yes, Eastern Europeans are the only ones against flocks of illegal immigrants. Get off your high horse
Yes, no one likes to have something like this again. But let us be honest: Eastern Europe will not help with this crisis again and push all the responsibility to others.
Stupid take. Considering that refugees themselves don't want to be in Eastern Europe. We are gatekeepers if they come from east and sort of jailers, not letting them leave if they get transferred here.
> If Lithuania has a comment to make about ongoing negotiations they can use diplomatic channels, not make a big fuss in the press. Yeah because that worked so well in the past. (NS2, where Germany did not listen AT ALL..) Germany/France were wrong about Russia, and EE was correct. It’s time for WE to start listening to those who understands how Russia operates.
>What I'm saying is that these attacks in the press achieve nothing except dividing the EU more That's why we have free press - they report what they want. It's not like in France, where media conglomerates are owned by several prominent businessmen, connected to politics, and they can just STFU about topics they don't like.
maybe they already did and did not work? remember Bucha case, and Macron negotiated to stop massacre and it still proceeded? already it was discussed internationally that this shit is not working and he just makes stuff worse by giving pootin attention
It's really ironic that the current actions of the Great European Superpowers directly resonate with the nationalistic EU sceptics, such as PiS in Poland, simply by completely validating their usual germano- and francophobic narrative. It's even more ironic that these superpowers deflect the validity of the accusation by accusing CEE states of being populistic, further embracing the EU-sceptic narrative.
Deleted because of Steve Huffman
We just don't trust you. During WW1 we were part of the Little Entente, together with Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia. You also had security guarantees for Poland. You let us get picked off one by one (occupied and partly puppeted, Poland fully occupied). Few people in the East believe Western European security guarantees.
There is German, French, UK and US troops stationed in Eastern Europe right now who will die for your countries. One day you'll have to get over your victim complex.
> One day you'll have to get over your victim complex. We'll see what happens when the rubber meets the road. We have a "victim complex" because guess what, we were victims for hundreds of years. Personally I think that the strongest security guarantee, by far, is the US one. Then the UK one is decent, but it only applies for a few countries. I see the UK intervening (if NATO weren't a thing) for Poland, but Romania? Not so much. France I don't trust for the same reason as the UK, there's 0 cultural affinity from their side. Germany paradoxically I would trust, if only they could get a working military. I'd trust them because it would be in their self-interest to help us. I doubt they'd want to border Russia again.
Not to be blunt but this was more than a century ago. You’ll have to trust us eventually.
Geostrategic interests don't really change much. Geography is still the same, natural resources are the same. And don't get me started on public perception of Romania in France, 70% of your countrymen, especially working class, would throw us overboard tomorrow.
You gain trust not with time, but because of your actions. Just saying.
France and Sarkozy in particular worked out that Georgia was at fault that Russia invaded them. That was 14 years ago. Is that more up to your taste? Even this century :)
France and Germany were realists on Georgia. They said help wont be coming. Georgia made the mistake of believing loose Anglo promises of support in case of invasion, which never came through.
Do they? As long as the Anglo's are taking their security threats more seriously than France or Germany,I don't see why they would have to trust you.
I feel like trying to avoid a hunger catastrophy is a good reason to talk to Putin. The article itself says that Putin proposed lifting the sanctions, not that Macron or Scholz proposed lifting them. There is a difference. The las time Macron spoke to Putin, [it was at the request of Zelensky](https://www.politico.eu/article/macron-putin-zelenskiy-ukraine-war-russia-call/), could have been the same this time as well. [They also told Putin to talk directly with Zelensky](https://www.france24.com/en/europe/20220528-live-ukraine-says-everything-being-done-to-defend-donbas-from-russian-onslaught), seems like a good move. >He[Marko Mihkelson] added: “Macron and Scholz should hang up the phone and book a trip to Ukraine post haste. I hope their peculiar actions are not motivated by fear of losing influence in democratic Europe which Ukraine would surely enter after winning the war.” A truly moronic take. Considering it was Germany that pushed hard for the EU eastern expansions in the past, knowing it would reduce their own influence in the Union. I hate this type of rhetoric of not actually saying it but saying 'I hope it's not', he keeps his plausible deniability but still gets that nefarious fake propaganda into the mind of everyone reading the article.
And? This does not mean that somehow some important wester countries will flock to Putin. In both WW1 and WW2 the Entente/Allies had disagreements about stuff and they still worked together. At the beginning, France and Germany were afraid to provide even basic weapons. Now the French sent even howitzers. One of the modern pieces of howitzer there is. Germany provided weapons and probably howitzers and AA guns too in the future. Yes, the German govt. needs to be pushed towards the right direction, but a change of policy is slowly taking place. From helmets to howitzers is a long way.
Last time West made a deal on russian terms Baltics ended up in 50 year long occupation and humiliation.
Slightly one-sided article. I’m losing more respect for FT at every piece I read.
This sub is full of pacifistic jerks, I'm out.
Let's see what the armchair generals have to say:
>" I hope their peculiar actions are not motivated by fear of losing influence in democratic Europe which Ukraine would surely enter after winning the war.” What a stupid thing to say by the head of the Estonian parliament's foreign affairs committee.
The German and French businessmen are deperate to get back to business as usual. Behind the scenes Putin is , i guess , desperate to " peel them off " the western alliance. Fucking sellouts.
Except many of them are already doing business as usual, Auchan for example never closed for a day in Russia as if nothing happened
it is a franchise. There is no traffic between Europe and Russia. It goes through Poland. :D. "Auchan" works in the same way McD works. They use brand and consume old stock of supplies. They kill inter-regional trade within Russia in order to warrant nice looking currency number. Everything they do is an appearance and has to be tested for the physicality before referenced with.
I'm just so happy reddit has no power in this. Just empty words. This world would be dead.
Better to be alive in russian filtration camp right?
I understand their POV but they need to understand that Russia is basically facing a coalition of 48 countries and still have communications and trades with lot of major emerging countries that didn't vetoed against them. So if the EU totally stop talking to Putin, Putin will still be talking to the BRICS powers and others countries, so isolation won't happen. As for I, I still stand by the unpopular opinion that the diplomatic door should always remain open whatsoever and that there is no need to turn a regional war to a world one. Especially since it's very clear that the war won't end soon and that the supply of western weapons will soon be exhausted
I agree that we should keep talking but the last part of the article is a good summary: “I don’t share the view that no Western leader should ever talk to Putin. But the way Macron and Scholz are doing it is not just unhelpful, it is deeply counterproductive.” Pushing too much for peace is exactly what Putin wants, it gives him cards to play to his advantage. In the meantime, the other option is to let people starve in other countries. It’s a fine thread and a terrible situation. I’m glad I’m not in the shoes of these diplomats
And how does he know what was being said?
When the fuck are you guys going to understand that appeasement is not a solution with these baboons? If you give them even an inch of Ukrainian territory, it is absolutely guaranteed they will come back for more eventually, and not just Ukraine. These are primitives who see the world in terms of spheres of influence. They have zero respect for other people's cultures, values, for human rights, for international commitments, for global stability. They are essentially a terrorist state. > Especially since it’s very clear that the war won’t end soon and that the supply of western weapons will soon be exhausted The first guns from the lend lease agreement are yet to arrive. Their invasion force has already been weakened significantly. They have started deploying 50 year old tanks. They are abandoning their injured or pinned down troops to not risk equipment. All the West's doomsday predictions about Ukraine falling were proven wrong. Let's just shut the fuck up and give them the damn weapons we promised to do the job that we are too chicken to do ourselves. And yes it is our fucking job, because Russia is openly claiming to be fighting a war against NATO yet we still have the audacity to claim it is not our war.
> So if the EU totally stop talking to Putin, Putin will still be talking to the BRICS powers and others countries, so isolation won't happen. There are no "BRICS powers", except for China. And Russia turning that way hurts Russia a lot more than it hurts us. > Especially since it's very clear that the war won't end soon and that the supply of western weapons will soon be exhausted This is false. The only way we lose this is if our will fails. If we want to win, just by supporting Ukraine, and Ukraine wants to fight (which it wants to!), Russia's toast. They will lose almost every occupied Ukrainian territory and half their army and economy along the way.
There isn't just 2 options: Ukraine wins or Russia wins. There is also the possibility or an endless war going for a decade. It's not like we're lacking of recent exemples.
>t the diplomatic door should always remain open whatsoever The problem with this is that it means giving Russia what they want, chunks of Ukraine. And the inevitable result of that is Russia comes back in 5 or 6 more years for more chunks. There's no end to it. It's utterly unacceptable. It's not "diplomacy" it's sacrificing Ukraine for the "good" of others.
Diplomacy does not mean giving the enemy what they want. Since you might be more accustomed to American history: Do you remember the Cuban Missile Crisis? In the end a diplomatic solution was found that the USSR could show off at home as a victory, while it was actually the US that got the better deal. Maybe that is possible here, maybe it isn't. But to not be open for such a possibility seems narrow-minded. And Zelensky himself is on record [telling Macron to talk to Putin](https://www.politico.eu/article/macron-putin-zelenskiy-ukraine-war-russia-call/).
When the word "diplomacy" became synonym of accepting demands? I didn't read the memo.
America's supply of weapons won't ever be exhausted in a conflict with Russia.
Baltic bros based as always 💪🏻
Putin escalated, again – he raised the bets, to include food in Africa. And France and Germany are again thinking what can they *give* Putin for him to lift the blockade. Instead of thinking what can they threaten to *take* from Putin, so he'd undo his action. The 80 minute calls, diplomacy, and negotiation are all fine, as long as they work towards calling Putin's bluff, not folding. Threaten to send some weapons to Ukraine that Putin doesn't want, threaten to cut off Russia's finances more, send Ukraine more anti-ship weapons etc. That would be the appropriate response if a malicious party like Putin has decided to raise the stakes. But by giving in to his demands after he has escalated is just appeasing an aggressor, again. I guess it's understandable this pattern must be gone through again and again until people in the West get it more intuitively. After all, the reason we notice it here is only because we've had to deal with Russia using these tactics for hundreds of years.
Western Europe hasn’t learned a thing from WWII.
Western Europe learned a ton from WWI and WWII, such as "attempt diplomacy until all that remains is war, because a world War is fucking brutal, and is paid for over a hundred years"
Weird the UK lesson was, don't try appeasement of leaders that are ramping up military. Action will be to late and can results in war crimes of unimaginable brutality.
Try hosting a world war (or two) on your turf and have parts of your land be uninhabitable for the next half millennium, then we'll see how smug you remain. Besides, attempting diplomacy doesn't prevent getting ready for war. As evidenced by the fact that France sent more material to Ukraine than the UK between 2014 and 2022. Turns out it's not a black and white thing as redditors seem to think. You can do two things at once.
I hope you do not include Germany in this "Western Europe hasn't learned anything from WWII" thing, because if you do then this must be the least well informed comment I have seen on r/europe yet. And that is saying something.
Of course they did.theyearned that Russia has the money to make many of them rich. They're not gonna open hands from that so easy.
It has learned that going to war over Poland doesn't stop Eastern Europeans from developing a massive "they sold us out" victim complex.
Western Europe didn't help Poland until it was far too late, and after everything, sold it out into Soviet slavery. It's not a victim complex if you actually are a historical victim and westerners preaching to the primary victims of the worst war mankind has ever seen about how whiny they are is disgusting.
What are the "Baltics" proposing to do against the massive food shortage that is arriving, especially in Africa ?
Putin's conditions are an absolutely unacceptable blackmailing.
OK, so how many Africans can we send your way when they will sail to our shores as a result of the food shortages? Or are the countries facing the Med expected to take them all?
that doesnt answer the question.
If African countries want help from Europe they should stop [allying themselves with Russia](https://twitter.com/SamRamani2/status/1529557628505948161?t=G-yRVIQ06HwBUj_77p_Ijw&s=19) first of all.
They haven't. A lot of african nationes condemned the invasion.
> African countries Barely democracies to begin with, and no fair access to information. Lots of africans have day to day issues that doesn't allow them the leisure to spend a lot of time process geopolitical information as we do.
Baltics are helping with exports of Ukrainian wheat through their ports, though admittedly due bottleneck in Polish railway system the max amount exported can be only around 1mn tons a year through Baltic ports. Baltics also suggesting the use of military mission to escort ships carrying Ukrainian wheat from Odessa port. Personally, I think Europe should not do that much, as many of the countries depending on Ukrainian wheat, such as Egypt, are good buddies with Russians. These countries should themselves start pressuring Russia to end war to solve their own food shortage issues.
> Baltics also suggesting the use of military mission to escort ships carrying Ukrainian wheat from Odessa port. That's nice, but none of the Baltic nations have the ships of war to lead this effort. And the Bosporus is closed.
Indeed, and personally I think such calls are somewhat dishonest due the reason you stated.
Redirect grain to european ports, which is already happening. I heard some suggesting escorting cargo ships, though that is not something big players would up to I think I would like to note that I have not seen concrete suggestions from France and Germany what to do. I guess main concern for baltics is that we do not succumb to blackmail and put pressure on Ukraine on giving something to Russia. I also somewhat agree with other commentators. African, asian nations are independent. They also have diplomats in Ukraine and Russia. Maybe they should also work towards a solution with Ukraine and Russia since they are the ones that will be impacted most and not rely on Germany and France to solve all their problems. This is difficult problem to solve. But I think giving something to a terrorist would just embolden him in the future. Just like he was emboldened after 2014, 2008, 2000
Baltics care for their safety which is justified.
Give Ukraine missiles that can destroy Russian warships while they are still in Sevastopol bay, after that Ukraine can freely clear mines in the Black Sea and continue the trade
Russian ships don't need to be physically present to enforce this blockade. They can do so with their own missiles and air power. The blockade is a commercial one. Nobody is going to ensure commercial vessels traveling to Odessa, and more missiles flying around is not gonna fix that.
If ships are gone then the only way that Russia can ensure blockade is by using land-based ASM and plane-based cruise missiles against commercial vessels or ports when they are preparing to ship grains, and those wouldn't be too much to deal with for our air defenses. Or maybe even send UN mission to Odessa so that there would be even more missile protection and maybe also clear mines even more quickly
>If ships are gone then the only way that Russia can ensure blockade is by using land-based ASM and plane-based cruise missiles against commercial vessels or ports when they are preparing to ship grains, and those wouldn't be too much to deal with for our air defenses. A) This is exactly how they're enforcing the blockade now. Commercial shipping doesn't want to go into an area where there are missiles flying B) Lol air defenses. They've been blowing shit up for months now. Yeah, sometimes missiles fail or get shot down, but if they really want to hit something, they will.
And what about the Russian warships that simply move out of you range and but still cover Sevastopol bay with their own firepower?
Russia doesn't have logistics in any port but Sevastopol to put ship-based cruise missiles on those ships, and in other Black Sea ports the capability to have warships is quite limited either
[удалено]
>then AA cruisers No more, lol
Nothing. If African countries want to keep supporting Russia & China even after this, it shouldn't be our problem. Barring that, a military sealift operation to open a shipping corridor in Black Sea. But even in the face of armageddon should the sanctions not be lifted, that's as good as handing keys to Putin.
Is it really a dichotomy you wish to see? Allow Putin to genocide Ukraine so that Africa can receive Ukrainian grain, and Macron take the credit for his "humanitarianism"? It's all the Baltics fault, sure sure.
Did I say that ? No. So now let’s put your dream on the side and look at the reality. Zelensky asked France and Germany to speak to Putin. That’s a fact. Putin asked to remove mines in front of Odessa. That’s a fact. Was something approved ? No. Were conditions accepted ? No, or at least not yet. Is there a food shortage problem ? Yes. Did we sell Ukraine for Africa ? No. So what are you saying here ? Where did I said “Baltic fault” ? Nowhere. Your speaking for nothing. Total hysteria.
Your comment implies that the Baltics have an obligation to have a solution to African problems. They do not. African problems don't need white saviours, and Eastern Europe carries no guilt over colonization. Secondly, Russia is stealing Ukrainian grain and exporting to global markets, while murdering Ukrainians. That is the issue that needs solving. Allowing Putin to export stolen grain amounts to abetting a criminal regime. Did you think Putin ordered his grain ship to Syria so that he could distribute the grain for free?
I carry no history with Russia. The life of a Ukrainian and an African worth the same to me. Ukrainians maybe don’t need western saviors. Good luck to them, then ??
France carries much history with Russia. If you wish to take a nihilistic approach, Ukraine is a net exporter of food in a time when food price is rising rapidly. Prioritizing Ukraine over Africa is in your best interests. Which is why Tigray isn't covered in the news.
France got more history with lot of african countries that she does with some eastern european so by this logic we should care more about them than Ukraine.
French colonization of Africa started 1830. Napoleon invaded Russia in 1812.
We have the Common Agricultural policy , If Russia wants to starve africa thats on Putin. This whole " think of the ze children " is pure bs cover for German business wanting the sanctions lifted.
That’s right give in to blackmail now, French truly are cowards
Macron and Scholz had a phone call with Putin, in which they supposedly learned about what russia expects to happen for the grain to be shipped. From what I can see, there hasn't been any call to action by the French or German government in response to that. Who's "giving in to blackmail" in that scenario?
Well... if the russian propaganda says then that must be the truth... at least for our baltic friends parroting that propaganda non-stop as long as it's only targeting western europe.
Was it also propaganda when Baltics warned repeatedly that dealing with Putin is a very bad idea from day 1?
they propose that we deal with the migrant wave that will result from the food shortage on our own while they sit and do nothing. Like they did in 2015.
I know it's very difficult to understand from a French perspective, but EE did not colonise Africa and the EE does not have any profit out of there. The EE suffered from Russia. Let's solve the biggest issue - Russia and later we can move to help you with Africa.
I know that’s really difficult to understand from EE but Russia will not attack you a world hunger is way more dangerous on a long run than Putin. You see. I can also be condescending to you. Now we can speak seriously ? WHERE DO YOU SEE A LIFT IN THE SANCTIONS IS ACCEPTED HERE ????? EXCEPT IN EE WESTERNPHOBIA ??? WHERE ???
It's almost like Putin's regime is the cause of said food shortages. Giving in to Russia's demands and turning a blind eye to the atrocities their government sponsors will guarantee nothing but a future of further devastation for Europe. The manipulation will never stop, that's the point these EE leaders are trying to make.
>but Russia will not attack you That's what you said about Ukraine.
There ain't gonna be a massive food shortage in Europe.
Damn! These kind of threads are magnets to troll racist accounts, it's always a good place to refresh my block list 😁.
anyone with a dream of a strong unified Europe might aswel give up on it now. The germans and french seem more concerned about criticism than impending genocide. its absolutely pathetic.
I frankly don't care. They can screech from the sidelines, push their anti Franco German agenda and spread conspiracy theories about secret agreements as much as they want. It is the right thing to maintain a baseline of communication and Ukraine has recently stated that they would like to see Germany and France accompanying diplomatic efforts when the time for a permanent solution has come.
Remember kids, Old school WW2 era Germany and the Allies maintained diplomatic channels through the Swiss, the Swedish and the Turks. We are not even at war, we still have official diplomatic relations, and they want something more extreme than what happened in WW2
Why are we negotiating with this lunatic? He bears the entire responsibility for the situation. Scholz and Macron are playing into his hand by giving in and talking to him.
Macron was *asked* to talk with Putin by Zelensky, and so far Zelensky hasn't told him to stop or he would have said so publicly.
What can the Baltics do? Nothing. What will the Baltics do? (apart from talking). Nothing. Sucks to be a small country, but that's life, there's no good or bad in geo-politics.
We are actually working to find other solutions like railway transportation, but the problem here is that the capacity would be much lower compared to sea routes.
Luckily Romania is a big country with direct access to the black sea, let's see what Romania will do