That may very well be, but the question was whether Ukraine could come out of this war sovereign, neutral, independent, etc.

But it's good that you yourselves seem to have realized this is not an option either.

:grin: :100: :cheer:

I think you are a bit confused about what independence or sovereignty is in our deeply interconnected and globalized World.

But it's good that you yourselves seem to have realized this is not an option either. — Tzeentch

You mean, living on Mars is not an option? I must share planet Earth with other human beings? What? Eight billion of them? Oh shoooooot!...

(you ought to realize that nobody is perfectly independent or sovereign. We all have to make compromises)

Some stuff about population movements and demographics, death rates and concentration camps. Don't expect much pro Putin stuff, or even much lets negotiate stuff. But interesting nonetheless.

Also, they're taking the Hobbits to Isengard.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/dec/03/terror-campaign-on-ukraine-embassies-continues-with-more-bloody-packages?CMP=twt_a-world_b-gdnworld

Russia has already had a huge demographic problem (and, actually Ukraine too), which has a long tragic history. The real burden of communism and two World Wars fought with little respect for life can be seen in the size of the Russian population. The gruesome fact is that The Russian Empire had a population of 136 million in 1900, but today Russia is barely any larger, at 146 million and it's depopulating. Just to make a comparison, there were 76,3 million Americans compared to now over 330 million, France had a population of 40 million and now 65 million and there were 56 million Germans in 1900, where there is 84 million now.

This has made the demographic pyramid in Russia to oscillate (as those generations that were substantially smaller after WW2 had less children) and then after the Soviet Union collapsed births fell also.



Of course, the demographics of Ukraine is even worse, but now as such a huge portion of the people are refugees, the statistics are quite out of the ordinary.

Recently, French president Macron came out with a statement saying that a new security architecture needs to be reached in which Russia's security concerns are taken into consideration.

Source: Macron Says New Security Architecture Should Give Guarantees For Russia

And he is right.

State TV, Russia:

Putin Cronies Resort to Begging on Live TV Over War Failures
^{— Julia Davis · The Daily Beast · Dec 4, 2022}

I am amazed by our people—and I unfortunately know many of them—including those in very high circles, who are afraid of this and are scared to call things by their proper names because of what people over there may think. We could spit on what they think over there! People who are afraid of the Hague—listen, you should be afraid to lose, to be humiliated and be afraid to betray your people. Let me tell you that if we manage to lose, the Hague—whether real or hypothetical—will come even for a street cleaner who is sweeping the cobblestones behind the Kremlin. — Simonyan

There won’t be any Hague if this happens, there won’t be anything at all. The whole world will be reduced to ashes. — Solovyov

God forbid, we can’t allow it and don’t even say it out loud but suppose that suddenly something happens and our country is unable to achieve victory: then we should proceed from the premise that everyone with no exception will be held accountable—whether they are located within the Russian Federation or abroad. Those abroad will most likely be immediately arrested. Whether he is a collaborator of Putin’s regime or was just passing by, it doesn’t matter. All of us will be considered guilty. What’s at stake is not only the existence of the country, but also the carefree existence of every citizen of the Russian Federation—our future is on the line. In order to avoid the Hague tribunals, the initiation of criminal cases, compensation, reparations—in order to avoid all this, we need a total intensification of military actions, we have to squeeze and pressure them so much that they approach us about a truce or a peace process… Otherwise, they will insist on capitulation. — Skabeyeva

How can we sleep while knowing that we aren’t sharing and aren’t participating? Rich people should get a hold of themselves and remember that we can’t continue living the way we’ve been living since the disintegration of the Soviet Union. We have to restore social equality. I am calling on you, citizens: you have to share! Raise the taxes on the rich and the well-to-do people. What is there to be afraid of? Raise the taxes! — Simonyan

Good grief. Promoting paranoia to the masses? It's Ukraine that's on fire. Muscovite street cleaners aren't in the line of fire.

Larger Wheat Harvest in Ukraine Than Expected
^{— NASA · Dec 4, 2022}

However, Russia will likely reap the benefit of a significant portion of the close to 27-million-ton wheat crop, said Skakun. The analysis showed that 5.8 million tons of wheat was harvested from areas that were not under Ukrainian control. That represents a loss of at least $1 billion, Abbassian noted.

Looting, after a fashion?

Rebuilding Ukraine After Russian Invasion Will Cost $500-600 Billion, Says World Bank VP
^{— RFE/RL · Dec 4, 2022}

Costly.

, others have suggested that it goes both ways.

:up: Address the point they brought up (plus public awareness) — Dec 3, 2022

Macron’s idea of ‘security guarantees’ to Russia faces backlash
^{— Alexandra Brzozowski · EURACTIV · Dec 5, 2022}

French president Macron criticized for suggesting ’security guarantees’ for Russia
^{— Reuters via Al Arabiya · Dec 5, 2022}

Anyway, opening some talks would be :up:

I don't know how much Macron's position on this war is conditioned by domestic politics. I understand his foreign affairs moves more as aiming at gaining a leading role in the EU, so I read his call for "security guarantees" for Russia as a way to restrain the American influence in Europe while profiting from the German weakness to advance French leadership (also for what concerns EU security matters).
But what are the odds for him to succeed? His losing popularity in France, in EU, in the US, and in Russia (after expressing his support for investigating Putin's war crimes)

My take on it is that the European leaders are starting to see where the war in Ukraine is headed - protracted, possibly escalated war - and want out.

This comes only a few days after Ursula's supposed "slip of the tongue", which I believe was intentional - a signal that the EU will not support the war in Ukraine if it means deceiving the public about the course of the war.

Meanwhile, leaked Kremlin poll shows 55% of Russians want to see negotiations with Ukraine to end the war: report
https://money.yahoo.com/leaked-kremlin-poll-shows-55-184223785.html

But what are the odds for him to succeed? — neomac

Macron is only stating the obvious: that Russia ain't going to disappear from the map, and Ukraine and her allies will have to live with it.

I am not sure what success looks like, when someone states the obvious. Maybe success in this case is measured by the amount of anger, suspicion and lamentations about his statement?

Macron is only stating the obvious — Olivier5

I disagree. Macron is not stating the obvious. He's talking about discussing "security guarantees" for Russia. And as far as I know these are the security guarantees Putin wanted: no more NATO enlargement; no missile deployments near its borders; and a scaling back of NATO's military infrastructure in Europe to 1997 levels. Opening to Russia's anti-NATO security concerns before even having Russia opening to Ukrainian and Western security concerns, along with Macron's position toward Putin since the beginning of this war seem more in line with a political agenda and likely an understanding of NATO's role that neither the US nor other more involved NATO partners are sympathetic with. So not only Macron is far from stating the obvious but he holds no leading position to weigh in.

Opening to Russia's anti-NATO security concerns before even having Russia opening to Ukrainian and Western security concerns, along with Macron's position toward Putin since the beginning of this war seem more in line with a political agenda and likely an understanding of NATO's role that neither the US nor other more involved NATO partners are sympathetic with. So not only Macron is far from stating the obvious but he holds no leading position to weigh in. — neomac

Good point.

The truth is that if would want a true solution, not a frozen conflict of some state (like what exists between the two Koreas), Russia simply would have to shed it's bellicose imperial aspirations just like France and the UK have done. The UK isn't eyeing to annex Ireland back to it's Kingdom. Hence Ireland doesn't have to be afraid of that. With Russia neighbors it's different.

True change is possible basically with a huge humiliating defeat, which would throw out the existing leadership. One possibility is that Russia would fall into even smaller parts. The parts in Russia where Muslims are the majority would likely be the first one's to go: Tatarstan, Bashkortostan, Dagestan, Chechnya, Ingushetia, Kabardino-Balkaria, Karachay-Cherkessia.

But if we want that an autocratic Russia will prevail and continue, then appeasement is the correct way, of course.

He's talking about discussing "security guarantees" for Russia. And as far as I know these are the security guarantees Putin wanted — neomac

I doubt Macron is trying to appease Putin. I don't quite see what the point of that would be, and he can't do that all alone anyway. I mean, the guarantees he is talking about would be given by NATO, not by France, so there's no sense in trying to go alone on this.

If you pay attention to what he actually said, the point he is making is that allies ought to discuss this, and come to some common position about what they can compromise on, what they are ready to offer in exchange for peace.

Yes. Since Macron also says Ukraine must take the lead on what terms they would accept, this matter of 'security guarantees' provided directly by the West is an alternative to acceding to Russia's demand that Ukraine write "never joining NATO" into their constitution.

For Russia to accept such an approach would undermine the pretext for the invasion whereby Ukraine is merely the foreskin of NATO.

I doubt Macron is trying to appease Putin. I don't quite see what the point of that would be, and he can't do that all alone anyway. I mean, the guarantees he is talking about would be given by NATO, not by France, so there's no sense in trying to go alone on this. — Olivier5

I agree. Yet he keeps talking about discussing anti-NATO security guarantees for Putin, “the rapist” - to recall your analogy - while still raping. Why? Even French commentators on TF1 look baffled at his words [1]
My guess is that Macron is fancying some security system alternative to NATO for Europe. So he’s trying to use Russian security concerns as a pivot to make Europeans step in that direction, hopefully with the support of other prominent allies.
The immediate vocal reaction of other NATO partners against his words (while none in their support as far as I know) along with a very weak French military support for the Ukrainian resistance so far, tell me that after 9 months of rehashing the same refrain [2], Macron is nowhere close to build any consensus around his ideas or leadership.


[1]


[2]

So he’s trying to use Russian security concerns as a pivot to make Europeans step in that direction, hopefully with the support of other prominent allies. — neomac

That's speculative, and far fetched.

In NATO, the only nation ever pushing back against the US is France. Other nations may agree with the French but they will not dare to say it. So Macron follows upon a time honored tradition: that of the guy talking about the elephant in the room, which all other partners are busy ignoring.

The irony is, had the European leaders understood the need to take into account Russia's security concerns earlier, in say, 2021, this entire war could have been avoided.

I purposefully say 'European', because the American leaders have eagerly steered Eastern Europe towards this war for 15 years without pause. The Europeans went along with it, mostly guided by ignorance and blind obedience to Uncle Sam.

If this conflict wasn't outright caused on purpose (can't have the Europeans and the Russians cozying up too much - Heartland theory and all that. Also, awful convenient, all those gas exports the Americans are currently enjoying), at the very least it was a risk the Americans were willing to take, and Ukraine a sacrifice they were willing to make.

That's speculative, and far fetched. — Olivier5

Speculative to some extent. After all "Unfortunately, the French president tends to come up with abstract ideas [in the public space], but never develops them to a level of specific programs or road maps. This allows officials, including those at the French Foreign Ministry, to interpret these ideas at their own discretion. Therefore, it is still too early to say if this particular initiative Macron has proposed will develop into something more significant. The current situation as it is, considering some comprehensive European security system is at least premature," he pointed out.
https://tass.com/politics/1546113


Why far fetched if " the only nation ever pushing back against the US is France"?

France intends to create a new "security framework" during the presidency. "We need to build it between us, Europeans, share it with our allies in NATO, and propose it for negotiation to Russia," Macron said.
https://www.dw.com/en/macron-proposes-security-pact-to-make-europe-a-power-of-the-future/a-60482625

The expansion of European defence capacities strengthens NATO, but France's goal remains strategic autonomy for Europe. Finally yet importantly, France claims leadership within this new European security architecture.
https://www.freiheit.org/european-union/frances-new-security-strategy

had the European leaders understood the need to take into account Russia's security concerns earlier, in say, 2021, this entire war could have been avoided. — Tzeentch

Here is my counterfactual: had the European leaders understood the need to take into account Western security concerns earlier, in say, 2014, this entire war could have been avoided.

More speculation. The US cannot forever treat its European allies as poodles. Not France in any case. The French are perfectly capable of telling the US to fuck off, and we regularly do so when we think it's in order, eg on the Iraq war. Anyone expecting us to just shut up and follow Washington's orders is sorely mistaken. Macron is perfectly within this French role in NATO, and I dare say that if France was not traditionally playing this role in NATO, someone else would probably step up and do it, because it's a useful role.

More speculation. — Olivier5

Are you talking to me?

Not directly related to Ukraine, yet still related to Western security concerns:
https://www.spiegel.de/international/world/beijing-s-long-arm-china-s-secret-police-stations-in-europe-a-d6732094-ca32-4c0a-8e6f-58b395b946aa