12-25-2022, 12:42 PM
(12-25-2022, 09:40 AM)OutsiderFan Wrote: Nobody other than right and left wing crazies take Putin seriously. Everyone else knows he can't be trusted one iota.True, IMO.
Quote:I don't see Ukraine negotiating anything until they have all their territory back. And they shouldn't.Ukraine gets to decide this, subject to international and military conditions. Right now, they are saying no negotiations until they get all their territory back. What they will say in six months, nobody knows, including Ukraine.
Quote:The only thing that makes sense is a DMZ between Russia and Ukraine, with the possible agreement Ukraine won't join NATO, but a trigger for Ukraine to join NATO immediately if Russia incurs its borders ever again. Seems fair and reasonable.No, it is neither fair, reasonable, nor possible. First of all, for a NATO membership to be effective, you have to train with NATO and be part of the decision making process. You can't show up the day the war starts and suddenly get meaningful help. Russia may not screw it up the next time and actually take Kiev in three days. Furthermore, the assistance of NATO members isn't mandatory. If you haven't "paid your dues", you very well may not get the kind of help you need. That is why Sweden and Finland, both countries that have worked closely with NATO, decided to join. They know they need to be "inside the tent" to get effective help. NATO may also need the Ukraine to help it defend places like Romania, even if all it provides is access. Giving them a "free ride" until they get invaded isn't going to be acceptable to the member states who are on the front lines too, but are expected to carry their own weight.
It also must be said that any deterrent value a "NATO on invasion" membership for Ukraine would be minimal. That is why NATO has recently placed symbolic (but significant) detachments in the former Warsaw pact NATO nations bordering Ukraine. They are "tripwires" that ensure an actual NATO response. NATO troops will die on day one, and that is a meaningful commitment. Anything less leaves open the option that NATO will do nothing. This is especially true if Russia were to be effective early in the war. At the very least, such an arrangement would leave open the danger of Russia miscalculating what level of commitment NATO had to Ukraine's defense. Many, many reasons such an arrangement wouldn't fly.
It is probable that Ukraine will require bi-lateral arrangements with several NATO nations in order to have a credible defense going forward, independent of NATO membership. A situation like South Korea is much more likely to be necessary. Ukraine will need to be sure they have adequate defense available without relying on meaningful Article 5 responses from the "significant" NATO militaries. It would take too long, and if they weren't fully "inside the tent" on day one may not be forthcoming at all.

