Summary

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy asserted that no world leader has the right to negotiate with Russian President Vladimir Putin on behalf of Ukraine.

Speaking to Le Parisien readers, Zelenskyy emphasized that Ukraine alone determines its future and any dialogue with Russia must follow a peace plan based on strength and international support.

He warned against negotiating without clear guarantees of security, highlighting the risks of Putin resuming aggression after a ceasefire.

Zelenskyy called for a strategy ensuring Ukraine’s long-term stability and security, beyond NATO or EU membership timelines.

  • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    59 minutes ago

    A few years ago, didn’t the British prime minister threaten to cut Ukraine out of economic relations if Zelenskyy negotiated with Russia? Kinda seams like that’s already happened.

  • tired_n_bored@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    ·
    edit-2
    8 hours ago

    I am so sad by how Ukraine has been handled.

    The West should have been an overwhelming power against Russian imperialism. Ukraine should have been given everything from the beginning, no strings attached, with no self-imposed red lines.

    They will swallow another democracy in 10-20 years and the cycle repeats.

    • thermal_shock@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 minutes ago

      everything keeps pointing to time being a circle, the same things will continue to happen every 20-30 years. like the show Dark.

    • caboose2006@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      6 hours ago

      Maybe no civilian targets. But other than that totally agree. We should have put lend lease circa 1940s to shame

  • mycall@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 hours ago

    While what Zelenskyy says is absolutely true, no county is obligated to help. Is this a good strategy to lend into?

    • megopie
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      50 minutes ago

      Yes, because it sends a clear message that retractions of aid will not cause them to negotiate, and thus removes a domestic political incentive to do so.

    • azertyfun@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      7 hours ago

      For Ukraine yes, but as far as Ukraine’s allies go? Only in principle. In reality we help Ukraine because it fucks up Russia, but we don’t give Ukraine the support it really needs or asks for because of [insert litany of excuses for years of delay on new weapons systems].

      Proxy wars are nasty business, and Ukraine has precious little say in any of the macro decisions. Russia and Russia’s ennemies collectively hold all the negociation leverage.
      Zelenskyy’s only hope is that domestic pressure will force the West to make a genuine effort at preserving as much of Ukraine’s sovereignty as possible, hence this media intervention.

      And he’s right to be worried, because the situation in Palestine shows, again, that most Western governments only stick to their stated principles when it’s politically convenient and shrug at literal genocide when it’s not. And the Russian propaganda machine is going to work overtime to make us think that any Russian concession to Ukraine would be against European interests.

      • Madison420@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        6 hours ago

        I think it’s worse than that. I think the building red tape was intentional to drag out the war as long as possible so Russia as always will continue to dump resources into it until it bankrupts them both militarily and economically.

    • scarabic@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 hour ago

      Of course no one can negotiate on behalf of Ukraine. Ukraine is holding on thanks to the support of several parties, and those parties do have the right to continue or end that support depending on the conditions they see. I hope this never happens, but If the US says they’re okay with letting Russia keep the territory its gained as long as hostilities end, then they are within their rights to withhold further arms aid on those conditions. Is that the US negotiating as if they are themselves Ukraine? No. Zelensky understands that he is existentially dependent on others. He’s just reminding them not to abuse that.

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      70
      ·
      17 hours ago

      Tbh a lot of people in the states are under the impression that we CAN do precisely that, because we absolutely have done in the past. But this is also kind of a whole different ballgame, in a ton of pretty crucial ways.

    • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      ·
      12 hours ago

      America can tell Russia Ukraine formally surrenders, and that the moon is made of cheese, it isnt going to stop anyone from fighting to protect themselves.

      The fact that even western countries seem to think that there can be negotiations about the fate of Ukraine and its people, without the Ukrainian voice present, is laughable and directley supports Putin and the Russian Mafia’s fantasy-narrative.

      • Bamboodpanda@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        8 hours ago

        If America and NATO pull back support, Putin will just say “fuck it” and take all of Ukraine and then do whatever he wants. Putin wants every territory that used to be Russia.

        • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          8 hours ago

          even if Nato tucks its tails between its legs and runs away from a winnable confrontation, Russia isn’t taking the whole country, they don’t have the manpower to run an occupation on a territory the size of Texas, with one of the most heavily armed and battle hardened populations on earth.

          Russia already signed away any hope of an occupation that didn’t fight them tooth and nail to the death, when they decided to massacre the villages of Bucha , Irpin, and Konotop. The world saw Russia for what it was then, That event “steeled” the resistance. I’m not trying to use hyperbole or sensationalism here, I’m stating that flat out, the Ukrainian people saw that the Russians will murder every single person who doesn’t submit, and they’ve only continued that savage barbarism ever since. Bombing and Murdering people into submission NEVER works. It only gives them a reason to fight.

          they weren’t equipped to do an occupation in 2022. they sure as shit are less equipped to do so now. It would be one of the bloodiest insurgencies in history. The Taliban didn’t have Leopards, Javelins, and HIMARs rockets they could put into hiding.

          • ameancow@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            They have no intention of occupation. They will raze every city to the ground to control the pipes and food. They just want the pipes and food, and people who don’t allow that are just going to be ground up like so much meat.

              • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                38 minutes ago

                Yeah, I don’t think that person realises that regardless of how cold and impersonal the resources are, you still need people to get the resources, and those people need to live, and that requires infrastructure, and that requires an occupation, that requires a functioning society.

                If they go scorched earth, they get exactly that - scorched earth.

                Honestly though I think the goal is not really resources but, as all fascists require, to have a perpetual enemy and a war to fight. Without that the fascists’ obsession with a plot turns inwards and they eat themselves.

        • ameancow@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 hours ago

          Putin wants every territory that used to be Russia.

          And then when he gets them all, he will want every territory that’s near Russia.

          And people will be like “Oh no, why didn’t anyone DO something when we could?”

      • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        11 hours ago

        While I do agree that this is all kind of bullshit and contributes to that issue of supporting Putin and the Russian mafia fantasy, the reality is that the entire Ukrainian war effort is propped up by the resources provided from western countries, which means that they do in fact the ability to continue or end the war pretty unilaterally. We can chest pound all we want, as can Zelenskyy, but he knows this. This war cannot continue without armaments from the US and Western Europe

        • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          14
          ·
          11 hours ago

          Western europe has no choice now, they have to arm up and possibly prepare for war with Russia, or resign, and accept Russian Dominion.

          The US will do as it wills, they’re going to backslide into fighting with themselves, and evidently with Canada and Mexico at this current rate. Europe will have to take the torch, if for no other reason than that they have no choice. Russia and NATO have been de-facto at war with each other for a while.

          I’ve even said that WW3 started years ago but people generally dont agree because they only associate the term WW3, with nuclear exchanges.

          theres’ no turning back from this state though. the last chance we had at an “offramp” was in september 6 to 21 of 2022. at that point, the russian army had suffered a major defeat and been pushed out of over half the territory they had conquered. That was Putin and Kremlin’s opportunity to back off before this spiraled totally beyond control, instead, that door was slammed shut forever on the 21st when Russia announced a mobilization.

          Now, its not going to stop until either Ukraine signs over part of its territory in exchange for NATO protection, Or the fight goes on until a government collapses. (either way just means more war, east or west) No ceasefire outside of of that deal I mentioned, will actually last, or truthfully stop the hostilities. Russian treaties are just an alternate spelling of Toilet paper

          • LandedGentry@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            10 hours ago

            I don’t disagree with any of this, all I’m saying is that Ukraine only has a war so long as its friends are giving them the means with which to wage war.

            I completely agree the US would be foolish to stop helping them. We should be ramping it up. Russia is a rogue state, it should be treated like one, with the relatively modest investment we put into it we have seen Russia take crippling blows that will take them easily decades to recover from. This is an opportunity to contain a major world threat and it is not lost on me that Trump and co are determined to squander the opportunity.

            • DicJacobus@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              ·
              10 hours ago

              Trump, Orban, LePen, Fico, they’re all comlicit in the gang of mafia stooges that are different flavors of the same Mobster Kleptocrat Authoritarian that Putin is the ringmaster of.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      47
      ·
      13 hours ago

      Probably already has.

      Given the Russian pushes since Trump won the election, I’m guessing the deal is “stop fighting (for a bit), but any land you’re currently on is yours to keep”.

      This obviously will not apply to the bits of Russia currently under Ukrainian control.

      Europe needs to up it’s munitions manufacture. Can’t rely on the US for that shit any more. They’ve gone mad.

      • Maggoty@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        ·
        12 hours ago

        Yep the Trump deal is currently no NATO and full handover of the two provinces plus anything Russia holds. It is absolutely ridiculous.

      • nomous@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        12 hours ago

        YES, please stop relying on us, it’s become a very sore spot for a lot of people.

        • zqps@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          9 hours ago

          I mean a lot of US folks seem way more smug than actually upset about it. Bringing it up to derail the conversation whenever anyone mentions US imperialism or the one-sidedness of NATO policy, as if the US would ever accept, let alone desire a position as equal among equals.

          • nomous@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            6
            ·
            9 hours ago

            Just IMO (and a lot of other peoples) military spending is completely out of control and a small fraction of it could pay for healthcare and education for everyone. But I agree the ruling class and associated MIC lobbyists aren’t going to let that happen any time soon, as nice as it would be.

            • zqps@sh.itjust.works
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              9 hours ago

              Oh absolutely. Gotta keep the plebs desperate and divided, while billions upon billions disappear into the most toxic and destructive industry there is right alongside fossil fuel corporations.

              They managed to keep military spending at an unprecedented level after the fall of the Soviet Union and the end of the cold war, in an amazing feat of governmental capture and exploitation by arms industry lobbyists. But it wasn’t enough, because it never is. Line must go up. The US has been seeking new reasons to funnel even more money their way ever since.

  • Th4tGuyII@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    65
    ·
    17 hours ago

    You’d think this would be a fairly cut and dry issue - the countries helping Ukraine wouldn’t like it either if another country started negotiating terms on their behalf (especially not with a monster like Putin).

    Ukraine and its people should be the ones to decide their own fate.

    I swear people who think otherwise must’ve read David vs. Goliath and sided with the Goliath.

    • djsoren19@yiffit.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      9 hours ago

      Hey Goliath was clearly in the right. David brought a gun to a fist fight, bastard never should have been allowed to walk free after that level of cheating.

    • Miles O'Brien@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      22
      ·
      16 hours ago

      must’ve read David vs. Goliath and sided with the Goliath.

      Bold of you to assume that they can read, or that they have read the Bible.

      In my experience not even “devout Christians” do that last one.

            • ouch@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              7 hours ago

              Honestly I’m not qualified enough to make educated guesses what type of texts those are. As in, are they written in a form that insinuates to be literal stories. The teachings of those stories are pretty understandable, though.

              Some say that the oldest stories are reverse prophecies. And we know how accurate prophecies are considered in general.

              The Bible is not a science book, but one of relationship between God and man.

              • AppleTea@lemmy.zip
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                51 minutes ago

                It’s interesting that that relationship changes, isn’t it? Like, early on God is the sort of deity to turn you into salt or flood the world if He’s displeased. And over time, He does that sort of spiteful intervention less and less. It’s hard not to see it as Him getting wiser and more compassionate. But… if He’s all powerful and all knowing to begin with, why does His approach to people change?

        • doctordevice@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          13
          ·
          12 hours ago

          100%. Reading the Bible cover to cover + learning about the history of how Judaism was born out of the polytheistic Yahwism and the resulting merge between Yahweh and the chief Canaanite god El was the way I just kept pulling the thread until it all came apart. The inconsistencies between an omnibenevolent god (El) and violent massacring war god (Yahweh) make a lot more sense once you know they used to be two separate gods.

    • john89@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      14 hours ago

      What about the country sending the most aid to Ukraine, without which Ukraine could not continue the war, being the one at the negotiating table?

        • john89@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          13 hours ago

          Then why is Ukraine constantly upset US isn’t giving enough aid?

          Also, Europe supplies more aid to Ukraine than the US.

          You might not realize this, but you’re comparing a continent to a country. US is still “the country sending the most aid to Ukraine,” which I said in my previous comment.

            • john89@lemmy.ca
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              4
              ·
              13 hours ago

              Yeah, but according to the other commenter Ukraine “doesn’t need it” and he doesn’t want Ukraine to be reliant on the US.

              So… they both do and don’t need aid from the US? Lol.

              • ammonium@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                6
                ·
                11 hours ago

                It’s not that hard. They don’t need aid to continue to fight, but they do need aid to be able to win.

              • Eezyville@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                12 hours ago

                I see what you’re trying to say and I agree but this isn’t the right echo chamber to be talking like that.

  • john89@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    15
    ·
    14 hours ago

    I disagree, unfortunately.

    If Ukraine wasn’t so dependent on outside assistance, then he would have a point.

    • Destide@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      12 hours ago

      A lot of us were responsible for them handing back their nukes on the principal Russia couldn’t invade. So it’s not a they should fend for themselves we pulled their teeth

      • john89@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        12 hours ago

        A wonderful point to bring up, but unfortunately one that has fallen by the wayside.

        Zelensky should be saying this.

  • FlashMobOfOne@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    14 hours ago

    It’s terribly ironic to watch people who support US interventionism pretend that Ukraine gets to have any real say in their own destiny at this point. Hundreds of billions of US taxpayer dollars do not go into your coffers without strings.

  • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    16 hours ago

    The right? Maybe not. The ability though? Certainly. Specifically the US absolutely has the power to negotiate an end to the war with Putin.

    • legion02@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      15 hours ago

      They could negotiate Russia’s end to the war using their own resources (ie. Mostly the embargos) but anything Ukraine forfeits would have to be negotiated by them. The US can’t just cede another nation’s land.

      • brucethemoose@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        edit-2
        15 hours ago

        We effectively can if we threaten to pull all support and harass Ukraine instead…

        Not that I want that, or have any say in that as a US citizen…

        • legion02@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          13 hours ago

          There’s no threat needed. Zalenskyy already knows he’s losing US support after January.

      • small44@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        15 hours ago

        Unfortunately the US definitely can since it gave a lot of military aid to Ukraine. It can force Ukraine to cede land

      • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        15 hours ago

        The effect would be exactly that. Actually the US ending support for Ukraine would result in not just ceding current borders, but huge additional losses.

        • legion02@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          This is literally Zalenskyy saying we can’t negotiate for him while knowing that he’s losing US support in January.

          • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            12 hours ago

            He’s doing whatever he can, but ultimately him saying this doesn’t make it so-- no matter how much he (or you) wish it would. Ukraine has been losing ground even with US support and they will only lose more without it. To pretend otherwise is to live in a fantasy. In such a situation the US has at least as much control over how much Ukrainian territory ends up under Russian occupation, as does Ukraine.

            • legion02@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              9 hours ago

              You’re confusing losing land because you can’t hold it militarily with negotiating an end to the invasion by ceding land. He’s said that no one will negotiate for Ukraine but Ukraine and since the incoming US administration has already said they’ll be ending support we really don’t have any leverage to encourage them to accept any terms. We can’t threaten to remove support that we’ve already said we’re removing.

              • electric_nan@lemmy.ml
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                8 hours ago

                I’m saying that there isn’t much of a difference. I agree that Ukraine is fucked and that the time for negotiations is long gone. Why would Russia negotiate now when they expect a clear advantage on the horizon?

                I think Zelensky is saying this to look tough and keep the support from Europe coming in at least.

  • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    15 hours ago

    Zelenskyy emphasized that Ukraine alone determines its future and any dialogue with Russia must follow a peace plan based on strength and international support.

    Support [outside of the racist countries’ unilateral support for Israel] will always be based on agreements. It doesn’t matter how much Ukraine supports Israel or sends its mercenaries to Gaza. How many countries will help out another for no return?

        • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          7 hours ago

          We havent given anything. And they have given everything. Please tell me what you think that military spending was going to go towards if it wasn’t spent on contracts to U.S. based companies as it has been… Because it can’t, and would not ever be allowed to be used on anything domestic. The less than 90b we have dispersed would disappear into the more than $2.5T in military spending we have had since that time. It cannot be used for helping with food prices, house/rental prices, healthcare reform… anything locally. The fact that it has taken over 2.5+ years and we haven’t dispersed HALF of what the Republican majority congress alloted for it, is frankly ridiculous.

          That military funding would have been spent by the military, not giving raises either… Nope. Just vanished into contracts under different names and no one would have given a shit about it because it wasn’t being called out by Russian appeasers on our U.S. news channels.

          Never once did that Republican congress call to cut military spending. That’s the only way that money would have went anywhere else.

          • mightyfoolish@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            7 hours ago

            We havent given anything. And they have given everything.

            Who is we and they in this case?

            I can see that I took the wrong idea from the article. I thought Zelenskyy was asking for supplies from Germany, France, US, Italy, etc. and then telling them to keep quiet afterwards.

            • LifeInMultipleChoice@lemmy.dbzer0.com
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              edit-2
              7 hours ago

              No, he’s saying they can’t speak on Ukraine’s behalf. Countries can withhold aid if they so choose, but they can’t say “Ukraine will surrender these grounds and forgive any reparations and allow you to build a demilitarized zone on their land if you stop where you are at” and expect Ukraine to just do so. It wasn’t a deep statement by him, it was a statement of if you want an agreement with Ukraine, you need to make it with Ukraine, stop trying to discuss deals behind their back and expecting them to honor them.