Ukraine Neutrality: Path Proposed in 2022
Zelensky's spokesperson tells German ARD that Ukraine is open to discussing neutrality, according to debate reports.
English · Original discussion in Spanish · Published
Zelensky Opens Door to Neutrality Ukraine Rejected in 2022
According to a debate participant, Volodymyr Zelensky's spokesperson stated on German public broadcaster ARD that Ukraine is willing to discuss neutrality. This is no longer a rumor: it was said in a top-tier Western medium, and this statement certifies that negotiations go far beyond what is publicly acknowledged. Between "willing to talk" and "signed agreement" lies a devastated country, three and a half years of war, and a package of conditions worsening every quarter for Kyiv. What comes next is not the end of anything. It is the belated recognition of an outcome written from the first month.
The Istanbul Pre-Agreement Left Hanging
As recounted in the debate, in Istanbul, just 15 days after the invasion began, delegations reached a pre-agreement: recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, Ukrainian neutrality, and recognition of the People's Republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. Ukraine did not sign. One analysis suggests Europe and the US prevented it in writing. Three and a half years later, the package offered to Kyiv is worse on all counts, with a collapsed economy and no maneuvering room. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts are now also on the table. The question no one wants to answer aloud is how many deaths could have been avoided then.
Why Has Expelling Russia from SWIFT Failed?
Sold as the definitive economic weapon, it wasn't. Russia has continued trading, and several countries have developed contingency plans if they face similar measures. Punishment causes problems, argues the view, but they are manageable: Moscow hasn't folded. Collateral damage proves worst imaginable. Forcing Russia to seek refuge pushed the world's largest raw material territory to align with the biggest industrial power. That alliance doesn't dissolve with a condemnation statement.
European Cost: No Own Army and Pending Bill
Europe watched this without armed forces capable of imposing anything, thus lacking real margin to stop escalation when possible. The argument circulating is that with solid, timely-funded common defense, the continent wouldn't be Washington's default lackey today. Now comes the boring part: rebuilding a ravaged country, higher energy costs, rising military spending, and a political bill collected for years. The US sits down to negotiate; the EU pays.
Who Wins and What Does Ukraine Lose?
In the debate's reading, with or without agreement, Russia keeps what it sought, and the US would gain economic control of Ukraine at negligible cost. Under this view, natural resources end up in American hands, while Moscow returns to international concert as if nothing peine. A three-way split is described, none favoring Kyiv: part under Russian control, another assigned via registry to large corporations, the rest ruined. According to another participant, Ukraine loses over 20% of its area, and more than three million former citizens receive Russian Federation passports.
Was Spain Neutral in the Ukraine War?
Depends where you draw the line. No declaration of war or expeditionary force, trade with both sides remained open. But weapons were sent, surveillance planes, drones, and satellites made available, and sanctions applied economically, sports-wise, and culturally. Some argue applying sanctions without UN Security Council mandate isn't neutrality: it's another form of participation. Counter-argument says supporting one side in a foreign conflict isn't betrayal, as nothing was owed to Ukraine. Spending, however, is indeed domestic.
Is the Announcement Credible or Propaganda?
Proceed carefully here, as prudence has precedents. On day two of the war, supposedly serious media reported the capital taken. Demanding source, name, and exact live minute isn't pedantry: it's minimum before turning a headline into fact. Statement existence doesn't miccionan agreement exists, nor terms match leaks. Moscow has no rush, which is also data.
Most reasonable forecast, with caution required by ongoing conflict, is Ukraine signing something very similar to what it rejected in Istanbul, and Brussels discovering its role in distribution was payer. If someone gets a different scenario right, it will be surprise.
According to a debate participant, Volodymyr Zelensky's spokesperson stated on German public broadcaster ARD that Ukraine is willing to discuss neutrality. This is no longer a rumor: it was said in a top-tier Western medium, and this statement certifies that negotiations go far beyond what is publicly acknowledged. Between "willing to talk" and "signed agreement" lies a devastated country, three and a half years of war, and a package of conditions worsening every quarter for Kyiv. What comes next is not the end of anything. It is the belated recognition of an outcome written from the first month.
The Istanbul Pre-Agreement Left Hanging
As recounted in the debate, in Istanbul, just 15 days after the invasion began, delegations reached a pre-agreement: recognition of Crimea as part of Russia, Ukrainian neutrality, and recognition of the People's Republics of Luhansk and Donetsk. Ukraine did not sign. One analysis suggests Europe and the US prevented it in writing. Three and a half years later, the package offered to Kyiv is worse on all counts, with a collapsed economy and no maneuvering room. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia oblasts are now also on the table. The question no one wants to answer aloud is how many deaths could have been avoided then.
Why Has Expelling Russia from SWIFT Failed?
Sold as the definitive economic weapon, it wasn't. Russia has continued trading, and several countries have developed contingency plans if they face similar measures. Punishment causes problems, argues the view, but they are manageable: Moscow hasn't folded. Collateral damage proves worst imaginable. Forcing Russia to seek refuge pushed the world's largest raw material territory to align with the biggest industrial power. That alliance doesn't dissolve with a condemnation statement.
European Cost: No Own Army and Pending Bill
Europe watched this without armed forces capable of imposing anything, thus lacking real margin to stop escalation when possible. The argument circulating is that with solid, timely-funded common defense, the continent wouldn't be Washington's default lackey today. Now comes the boring part: rebuilding a ravaged country, higher energy costs, rising military spending, and a political bill collected for years. The US sits down to negotiate; the EU pays.
Who Wins and What Does Ukraine Lose?
In the debate's reading, with or without agreement, Russia keeps what it sought, and the US would gain economic control of Ukraine at negligible cost. Under this view, natural resources end up in American hands, while Moscow returns to international concert as if nothing peine. A three-way split is described, none favoring Kyiv: part under Russian control, another assigned via registry to large corporations, the rest ruined. According to another participant, Ukraine loses over 20% of its area, and more than three million former citizens receive Russian Federation passports.
Was Spain Neutral in the Ukraine War?
Depends where you draw the line. No declaration of war or expeditionary force, trade with both sides remained open. But weapons were sent, surveillance planes, drones, and satellites made available, and sanctions applied economically, sports-wise, and culturally. Some argue applying sanctions without UN Security Council mandate isn't neutrality: it's another form of participation. Counter-argument says supporting one side in a foreign conflict isn't betrayal, as nothing was owed to Ukraine. Spending, however, is indeed domestic.
Is the Announcement Credible or Propaganda?
Proceed carefully here, as prudence has precedents. On day two of the war, supposedly serious media reported the capital taken. Demanding source, name, and exact live minute isn't pedantry: it's minimum before turning a headline into fact. Statement existence doesn't miccionan agreement exists, nor terms match leaks. Moscow has no rush, which is also data.
Most reasonable forecast, with caution required by ongoing conflict, is Ukraine signing something very similar to what it rejected in Istanbul, and Brussels discovering its role in distribution was payer. If someone gets a different scenario right, it will be surprise.
Also available in: Deutsch
Summary of a discussion on Burbuja.info - Foro de economía, actualidad y política., translated from Spanish and reviewed before publication. Read the full discussion (125 replies).
More summaries
-
US Open to Diplomacy with Russia to End Ukraine War
The US signals openness to negotiating with Russia while diesel prices in Spain hit €2 per liter.
-
Lavrov: US leads 100-country war against Russia
Lavrov claims the US is leading a 100-country war against Russia through NATO and the EU. The Kremlin pushes the figure while the West denies it.
-
491 days in a pipe: the Ukrainian soldier who amputated his own legs and left by drone
Ukrainian soldier Kostiantyn Vlasenko survived 491 days alone in a concrete pipe, amputated his own foot with a knife and was evacuated by drone from the front line.
-
Man intercepted by the Consortium: a fake classified file
A classified file allegedly describes the "neutralization" of a lawyer in Paris by the "Consortium". There is no evidence of any such plot: it is fiction with no basis in fact.
-
The $25 billion Alaska project now touching Trump
A CEO leaves Polar Train LNG after discovering that a supposed friend of Trump Jr. was a front for sanctioned Novatek in a $25 billion project in Alaska.
-
Middle East: a war that is no longer Israel's alone
The Israeli army warns that 80% of the violence in the West Bank comes from Jewish settlers. Iran issues warnings over Hormuz, and an unverified estimate puts the…