@elarquitecto wrote in post #268:
@lowfour wrote in post #266:A ver que se cuenta el calvo danésdice que es hora de mandar los gripen(yo os hago la traducción libre, que es la buena)pero es básicamente éso, rusia está en la lona y los...
Del video del calvo me quedo con "A ver como explica el gordo que dejan de ganar dinero con las armas a Ucrania por ayudar abiertamente a Rusia".
Es un buen vídeo y un buen análisis.
@elarquitecto wrote in post #270:
yo supongo que han dicho "vamos a pensarlo" o algo así, pero qué coño pinta rusia-genocida en el g8?? de hecho, estamos ya viendo que tampoco pinta mucho usa-trucha que apoya a los genocidasa ver si e...
Es el Newsweek, recordemos que se pueden comprar artículos ahí y ya han colado unos cuantos panegíricos prorusos.
Zelenski enfrenta una decisión existencial que va más allá de lo militar, económico o político.
“No es seguro si un mal acuerdo de paz o continuar la guerra lleva más probablemente a la supervivencia de Ucrania como Estado.”
“Es una decisión sobre los valores… sobre tu concepción del liderazgo… incluso puede ser espiritual o religiosa.”
Imponer un límite al tamaño del ejército ucraniano (600,000 u 800,000) aunque sea superior a lo que Ucrania puede mantener, sigue siendo tóxico.
“Lo que se pierde, incluso si no tiene impacto militar práctico, es soberanía.”
“Es políticamente tóxico que tu vecino imperialista ponga límites a tu ejército.”
Dmitriev no actúa por órdenes directas de Putin, sino que trata de anticipar sus deseos.
“Es casi el hecho más esencial del sistema político ruso: Putin externaliza el poder presidencial y luego reacciona.”
Aceptar un acuerdo de paz doloroso exige cierta desmovilización del pueblo.
“El riesgo es que desmovilices a tu población y luego necesites volver a movilizarla… y no puedas.”
“La movilización política ucraniana no está ligada a una teoría coherente de la victoria.”
Para los ucranianos, el territorio es identidad: “Ucrania es Ucrania dentro de unas fronteras específicas.”
“Algunas tierras han pasado a los rusos, pero siguen siendo tierras ucranianas.”
En cambio, en Rusia: “Si el óblast de Kursk se uniera a Ucrania, a muchos en Moscú no les importaría.”
“La población rusa tiene una relación colonial con el Kremlin… si cambia el territorio mañana, pues así es la vida.”
Pues la explicación que más me convence es la que dio Vlad el Brasas hace dos días. Witkoff ha ido por libre para pillar contratos con Rusia, auspiciado por Vance, luego se lo ha presentado al gordo y como el gordo está gagá ha dicho que si. DECADENCIA DEMOCRÁTICA MANIFIESTA.
Es como lo del Kiril, lo hacen para ganarse puntos ante su jefe.
Por supuesto digo los Gripen en Ucrania, parando toda la mierda rusa.
Yo creo que ahí veríamos F35 usanos cazando a los Gripen y todo.
Os digo una cosa, creo que los Truchos acaban juzgados por alta traición. Lo veo cada vez más cerca. El Musk lo olió y salió de ahí por patas para que la gente se olvide de lo que hizo. Pero estos acaban ante un tribunal militar.
Son la versión gringa de los lazis
https://samf.substack.com/p/the-witkoff-dmitriev-peace-plan-annotated
We now know a bit more about the process which led to the new peace plan and we now have a copy of its contents, to which I will turn soon.
Yesterday I noted that the plan, which was largely drafted by Steve Witkoff and Kirll Dmitriev, neither of whom are professional diplomats, was slanted in Russia’s favour, had been leaked by Dmitriev apparently to give it a push, had not been negotiated with either Kyiv or Moscow, and that many provisions were unclear even though the stories insisted that it was to be presented to Kyiv as a fait accompli.
With more reporting since I posted it seems that the proposal is more developed and has involved more people around the Trump administration. My guess is that as people looked at the plan it was starting to get pushback (possibly from Ukrainians) and that Dmitriev leaked it to give it a higher status and invest it with momentum, but that is only a guess.
At any rate if that is what was intended it succeeded as it is now being discussed as something real and in play. But it is clearly insufficiently developed to be presented as a fait accompli, and contrary to the original leaks, that will not now happen. This is not least because the Russians have been blindsided and are unhappy with the process and some of the content. So it is up for consultation and discussion with both sides.
We can now go further because a copy of the ‘28 point plan’ is in circulation, which I assess below. In key provisions, most importantly the territorial, but also in limiting the Ukrainian army and keeping Ukraine out of NATO, it reflects a Russian ‘wish list’, but it is only to fair to acknowledge that in some respects, notably on security guarantees and reconstruction, it tries to offer something to Ukraine. The effort appears to be one of trying to come up with a package that could work for both sides, though requiring both to make concessions.
By the nature of the conflict, the most important concessions come from Ukraine as it was the victim of aggression and it is its territory and not Russia’s that is occupied. But there is a lot in this that Russia still won’t like or at least will want to reframe. As important, it’s a dog’s breakfast, with some strange provisions, leaving open many questions for contentious interpretation and potential reframing.
I’ve provided annotations, noting the issues it raises. Others I’m sure will pick up points I’ve missed.
Ukraine’s sovereignty will be confirmed.
A full and comprehensive non-aggression agreement will be concluded between Russia, Ukraine, and Europe. All ambiguities of the past 30 years will be considered resolved.
[What ambiguities? Promises of non-aggression have been made before, for example in the 1997 Founding Act, so while these are good things to say it remains unclear how much they can be trusted]
Russia is expected not to invade neighboring countries, and NATO will not expand further.
[No membership of NATO for Ukraine, and also in this formulation, any other potential candidates, has been a feature of Trump plans from the start. What is ‘an expectation not to invade.’ It imposes no obligations. A simple ‘will not’ would suffice.]
A dialogue between Russia and NATO, mediated by the United States, will be held to address all security issues and create conditions for de-escalation, in order to ensure global security and increase opportunities for cooperation and future economic development.
[How can the US ‘mediate’ a dialogue between Russia and an alliance of which it is a part? Otherwise similar aspirations have been found in previous treaties].
Ukraine will receive reliable security guarantees.
The size of the Armed Forces of Ukraine will be limited to 600,000 personnel.
[This is more than envisaged under previous Russian proposals - in 2022 it was 85,000 - but why is it needed for a sovereign country? There is no mention of limitations on particular classes of weapons - aircraft, tanks etc. There are no restrictions envisaged on Russian forces.]
Ukraine agrees to enshrine in its constitution that it will not join NATO, and NATO agrees to include a provision in its charters that Ukraine will not be admitted in the future.
[Ukraine aspires to join NATO. Its constitution can be changed to preclude that, though this will be contentious. It can then be changed back again at a later date. If this is referring to the 1949 Washington Treaty that was signed and sealed in 1949. It has only been amended to take account of new members. The NATO Council could certainly promise not to admit Ukraine, although it could also change its mind].
NATO agrees not to station troops in Ukraine.
[There goes the Coalition of the Willing (CoW), or at least the part of the plan that envisaged small European military contingents backing up Ukrainian front line forces (which would now also be limited).]
European fighter jets will be stationed in Poland.
[It’s an odd statement, as it is up to Poland, but I presume this is intended to rescue the part of the CoW plan that envisaged air support that could impose a no-fly zone. I can’t imagine Russia will be delighted by this but in practice it could happen anyway. No mention of potential role for CoW naval forces.]
U.S. guarantee:
The United States will receive compensation for providing the guarantee.
[What does this mean? From whom, in what form and how much? A security guarantee is a promise to act in certain contingencies. It doesn’t cost much to make the promise. This plays to Trump’s transactional view of alliance security but it is a weird insertion in a peace treaty]
▪️ If Ukraine invades Russia, it will lose the guarantee.
[Of course unlikely but remember that the Russian pretext for the full-scale invasion was that Ukrainian forces were ‘invading’ the Luhansk enclave]
▪️ If Russia invades Ukraine, then in addition to a decisive and coordinated military response, all global sanctions will be reinstated, recognition of new territory and all other benefits of this deal will be revoked.
[Well unless the US intends to do it all by itself ‘decisive and coordinated’ means a NATO response and not just a US one (so does NATO get compensated?). In fact this has more automaticity than NATO’s Article V. So Ukraine should be happy with this but for the same reason Russia will not. Once sanctions have been removed it will not be easy to reinstate them. If Ukrainian territories have been integrated into Russia does that mean that the US would lead a fight to get them back or just withdraw recognition?]
▪️ If Ukraine, without cause, launches a missile at Moscow or Saint Petersburg, the security guarantee will be considered void.
[But Rostov would be OK? And what would be sufficient cause to justify a missile launch? Another weird clause.]
Ukraine has the right to EU membership and will receive short-term preferential access to the European market while this issue is under consideration.
That is up to EU but nice if Russia conceded as this whole wretched business began when Putin tried to stop Ukraine signing an association agreement with the EU in 2013]
A powerful global package for Ukraine’s reconstruction, including but not limited to:
a. Creation of a Ukraine Development Fund to invest in fast-growing sectors, including technology, data centers, and artificial intelligence.
b. The United States will cooperate with Ukraine to jointly restore, develop, modernize, and operate Ukraine’s gas infrastructure, including pipelines and storage.
c. Joint efforts to rebuild war-affected territories to restore, reconstruct, and modernize cities and residential areas.
d. Infrastructure development.
e. Extraction of minerals and natural resources.
f. The World Bank will develop a special financing package to accelerate these efforts.
[In principle all good but this will require a lot of money. (e) presumably refers to the US-agreement on minerals but it is not explicit]
Russia will be reintegrated into the global economy:
a. Sanctions relief will be discussed and agreed upon gradually and individually.
b. The United States will conclude a long-term economic cooperation agreement aimed at mutual development in the spheres of energy, natural resources, infrastructure, artificial intelligence, data centers, Arctic rare-earth mining projects, and other mutually beneficial corporate opportunities.
c. Russia will be invited to return to the G8.
[Not surprising but Russia will worry that (a) will be a slow process, and it is very dependent upon EU and UK so they will need to agree package. This is their major leverage over the fate of this plan
Equally it is not for the US to decide alone if Russia can rejoin the G7. It has to be agreed by the other members]
Frozen assets will be used as follows:
US$100 billion of frozen Russian assets will be invested in U.S.-led efforts for Ukraine’s reconstruction and investment. The United States will receive 50% of the profits from this initiative.
Europe will add US$100 billion to increase the investment available for Ukraine’s reconstruction. European frozen assets will be unfrozen.
The remaining frozen Russian assets will be invested in a separate U.S.–Russia investment vehicle that will implement joint projects in designated areas. This fund will aim to strengthen relations and increase shared interests to create a strong incentive not to return to conflict.
[I can’t believe that Russia will agree to any of this. They want their assets back. Equally Ukraine wants them as reparations for all the losses they have suffered - and even then it will not be enough. What is with the US making a profit from this?]
A joint U.S.–Russia security working group will be established to facilitate and ensure implementation of all provisions of this agreement.
[At the very least Ukraine should also be part of this process, otherwise it is wholly reliant on the US to look after its interests when it has been doing the mediating. Russia will continue to accuse Ukraine of breaking provisions and Ukraine needs to be able to defend its position and point to areas of Russian non-compliance. As drafted denies Ukraine any agency over the implementation ]
Russia will codify a non-aggression policy toward Europe and Ukraine.
[Following the UN Charter would be a start. I’ve no idea what this could mean. Non-aggression should not be conditional.]
The United States and Russia will agree to extend nuclear non-proliferation and arms control treaties, including the START I Treaty.
[The non-proliferation is not time limited so it does not need extension. I presume they mean New START rather than START 1, and its extension would be welcome.]
Ukraine agrees to remain a non-nuclear state in accordance with the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty.
The Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant will be put into operation under IAEA supervision, and the electricity produced will be distributed equally between Russia and Ukraine — 50:50.
[This assume Zaporizhzhia remains de facto part of Russia see below]
Both countries commit to implementing educational programs in schools and society aimed at fostering understanding and tolerance of different cultures and eliminating racism and prejudice:
a. Ukraine will adopt EU rules on religious tolerance and protection of linguistic minorities.
b. Both countries will agree to abolish all discriminatory measures and guarantee the rights of Ukrainian and Russian media and education.
c. All Nazi ideology and activity must be rejected and prohibited.
[Well good luck with all of that if it is supposed to apply to Russia. As the Kremlin has adopted its own self-serving definition of what constitutes Nazi ideology and activity (more or less anything hostile to Russia) we can only guess how this would be used. Equally interesting to see how Ukrainian rights are to be protected in Russia.]
Territories:
a. Crimea, Luhansk, and Donetsk will be recognized as de facto Russian, including by the United States.
b. Kherson and Zaporizhzhia will be frozen along the line of contact, effectively granting de facto recognition along that line.
c. Russia will relinquish other agreed territories it controls outside the five regions.
d. Ukrainian forces will withdraw from the part of Donetsk Oblast they currently control, and this withdrawal zone will be considered a neutral demilitarized buffer zone, internationally recognized as territory belonging to the Russian Federation. Russian forces will not enter this demilitarized zone.
[This meets Russia’s core territorial demand, although with some strange twists. De facto is less than de jure. It normally refers to a situation that exists in reality and cannot easily be changed, but is not necessarily recognized in law. In the event of a ceasefire being agreed it was always safest to assume that the occupied territories would become de facto Russian, without being recognised as such by Ukraine or the wider international community (as with Crimea). De jure refers to situations that are legally recognised and have official status. Russia has incorporated the four claimed oblasts into its constitution and wants them officially recognised. At any rate you don’t formally recognise something as de facto - it just is. So this would be meaningless. Russia will want de jure.
Turning the remaining part of Donetsk into a neutral demilitarised zone is an odd sort of compromise. First this is full of Ukrainian defences, including minefields (there are no reference to demining anywhere in the document). Demilitarising it would be no small matter. And if it is part of Russia - even if de facto - how can it be neutral. Ukrainians also live there. Are they supposed to abandon their homes or become Russian or have some limbo status because they are in neutral territory?]
After future territorial arrangements are agreed, both Russia and Ukraine commit not to alter them by force. Any security guarantees will not apply if this obligation is violated.
Russia will not obstruct Ukraine’s use of the Dnipro River for commercial activities, and agreements will be reached on the free transport of grain through the Black Sea.
[There were agreements on this in the past which Russia abandoned]
A humanitarian committee will be created to resolve outstanding issues:
a. All remaining prisoners and bodies will be exchanged on an “all for all” basis.
b. All civilian detainees and hostages, including children, will be returned.
c. A family reunification program will be implemented.
d. Measures will be taken to alleviate the suffering of victims of the conflict.
[Hard to object but not exactly strong on detail]
Ukraine will hold elections in 100 days.
[There is a need for Ukrainian elections but it also requires the conditions for them to be conducted safely. Can the residents of Donetsk vote? At rate elections are up to the Ukrainians as a sovereign country. Why not include a demand for free and fair Russian elections?]
All parties involved in this conflict will receive full amnesty for actions during the war and agree not to bring claims or pursue grievances in the future.
[War crimes go unpunished].
This agreement will be legally binding.
Its implementation will be monitored and guaranteed by a Peace Council chaired by President Donald J. Trump. Sanctions will be imposed for violations.
[This is modelled on Gaza. How does it relate to point 15 or indeed the other provisions on guarantees? What happens when Trump goes? Who will be on this Peace Council? What will be the terms of reference? Most peace treaties will have provisions to deal with disputes and if necessary provide for arbitration. With Gaza the Trump plan was backed by the great majority of regional states and the aim was to write Hamas out of the script. The military and political relationships were quite different.]
Once all parties accept this memorandum, a ceasefire will take effect immediately after both sides withdraw to the agreed points for the start of the agreement’s implementation.
Wisely Zelenskyy has said he’ll work with the Americans on the plan. He might as well wait until the Russians formulate a response. For now their reaction has been muted. If the Russians just accepted it they could claim a sort of victory but it would not quite be on their terms. As I surmised yesterday and have shown above this is not a fully developed plan which could be presented, as was the Gaza plan, on a take it or leave it basis. Even then Netanyahu fiddled with the details at the end.
This is a plan that even if there was no change to the underlying principles and concessions would require a lot more work, and so will delay a ceasefire. As soon as both sides can object and amend that will lead to a protracted negotiation and so even more delay. The advantage is that having a plan set down allows one to see the pitfalls. It does not necessarily enable one to see a way though them.
antes de leer lo del freedman (que es largo, pero parece bastante exhaustivo), te pregunto una cosa; si nosotros, que somos unos mataos (o sea, no curramos en inteligencia y tal), desde nuestra casa, echando un rato libre, con la tele o radio puesta de fondo, cruzando 2 o 3 tuits o reddits, un poco de salseo en foros (esto ya poco), tenemos una idea más o menos clara de qué coño pasa con el witkof y toda la corte celestial de mariachis tarados magafanters... con sus "coleguis" ruskis que están en la puta ruina y sin un horizonte claro de vitoria ni ostias, si acaso mucho éxito en la desestabilización política inoculando el truchismo en los parlamentos europeos y tal, y en redes (ya veremos si les dura, porque la pasta se agota, y mantener granjas ciberputis a este nivel es caro)
pues ya me dirás qué será lo que saben los servicios de inteligencia PROFESIONALES, con info de primera mano o algo así, los del mosad, los britons, gabachos, germanos, etc... incluso en el cni debería de tener más y mejor info, no??
si nosotros vimos desde el minuto 1 que era una trampa, que rusia estaba pidiendo otro balón de oxígeno, desestabilizar al zelensky (el punto nosequé es celebrar elecciones en ucrania en 6 meses, me lol), que hasta han colado artículos en prensa seria y tal diciendo que zelensky en su peor momento...
o que incluso buscan trolear al trucho porque así separan más usa de europa, que es lo que parece que va a ocurrir (y aquí es donde falla el calvo danés, la política de "apaciguamiento" del trucho está ganando tiempo) de manera "formal", porque "materialmente" ya sabemos que los truchos nos odian y odian toda la democracia parlamentaria (prefieren un buen putinato o un truchinato o algo así), y de hecho este "acuerdo" no es tal, es una humillación para europa
en fin, que digo yo que los vonderleyen, macron y tal "saben"
los que andan reunidos con la poli en las puertas del parlamento en suecia, "saben"
el comunicado báltico del otro día no era para dejar capitular a ucrania
hoy el ken ha dicho que ha llamado por teléfono a zelensky y que todo el apoyo (no le manda gripens porque no tenemos, pero ya le mandará loquesea)
en fin, este teatrillo "diplomático" está coregrafiado o no entiendo nada ya
@lowfour wrote in post #271:
@elarquitecto wrote in post #268:@lowfour wrote in post #266:A ver que se cuenta el calvo danésdice que es hora de mandar los gripen(yo os hago la traducción libre, que es la buena)pero es básicamente...
yo del calvo danés, lo que más me ha llamado la atención es lo de que parece redactado en ruso y maltraducido al inglés
me lol
esto es lo que nomejodas, si lo sabe el clavo ese, lo tienen que saber en el pentagono y tal...
te compro lo de que acabarán procesados por alta traición
che, estoy por abrir hilo aparte para comentar el tema... es que si no es traición esto, yo no sé
@elarquitecto wrote in post #282:
@lowfour wrote in post #271:@elarquitecto wrote in post #268:@lowfour wrote in post #266:A ver que se cuenta el calvo danésdice que es hora de mandar los gripen(yo os hago la traducción libre, que es ...
Yo creo que al final no es ni ideológico ni pollas, no están planificando como joder a la EU... es un tema crematístico. El Witkoff quiere pillar cacho en Rusia, contratos, casas cualquier movida y se lo han prometido a cambio de meterle esa mierda de plan de paz que más que un plan de paz es la carta de los reyes magos de Putin.
No me jodas, tiene que haber 100 y 200 y 1000 militares Usanos que han ayudado a Ucrania MUY puteados. Puteadísimos.
Rory y Allastair, el dúo sacapuntas, hacen un desglose de la mierda de propuesta esta. Es brutal y acojona de verdad.
Atención, que al parecer el Kiril es ex goldman sachs, ex mckinsey, etc... Se lo presentó al Witkoff y lo filtró para hacer un "anchoring de libro". Y el hijoputa del Vance por supuesto lo compró de pe a pa porque se alinea con su postura... que cada vez está mas clara es pro rusa. Yo creo que el verdadero asset ruso no es Trump, es el ojostiznaos.
Estos dos dicen que Trump es mucho más consistente de lo que nos queremos creer... siempre se alinea con Rusia.
El NYT dice que el Rubio intenta desesperadamente retomar el control del proceso de las manos del incompetente/corrupto Witkoff. Rory y Allastair también destacan eso... la aparición de "diplomáticos freelance" como el Witkoff que empiezan a negociar a su puta bola y pasando de todo, Y eso se alinea con el Vexler que decía que lo que esto demostraba era el total caos del gobierno de USA, auténtica decadencia democrática donde la peña va por libre buscando sus intereses.
En serio el Vexler me asusta porque acierta mucho... y eso requiere tener mucha y buena información que un incapacitado en cama NO TIENE. Ese tiene fuentes rusas o algo.
While President Trump attacked the Ukrainians, Secretary of State Marco Rubio flew to Geneva to seize control of negotiations that were going off the rails.
Last week, President Trump set a hard deadline for Ukraine’s president, Volodymyr Zelensky, to agree to the details of a 28-point draft peace deal with Russia. If he refused, Mr. Trump said, the Ukrainian leader would be left “to fight his little heart out.”
By Monday, that deadline, Thanksgiving Day, was gone. The 28-point plan, which was widely criticized as a series of one-sided concessions to President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia, had been shrunk to closer to 20 points.
Some of the most sensitive elements, including limits on the size of the Ukrainian military and a proposed ban on basing NATO troops inside Ukraine, were set aside for future negotiation. So was the question of where the new boundaries between Russia and Ukraine would be drawn.
But the price of the changes, made during a series of meetings over 11 hours in Geneva led by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, is clear. Mr. Putin, some Trump administration officials predict, is likely to dismiss the new draft out of hand, which would lead to a long and drawn-out negotiation — just what Mr. Trump was trying to short-circuit.
As Mr. Rubio said when he was leaving Geneva on Sunday, “Well, obviously the Russians get a vote here, right?”
They do, of course, and whether this latest effort amounts to anything may hinge on the Russian reaction.
As the weekend played out, there were reminders everywhere that the players view the negotiation through entirely different lenses. To some in the Trump administration, it is about finding middle ground by writing out each side’s demands, then making hard compromises. To Mr. Putin, it is about restoring lands that have deep cultural, political and military import to Russia and, by his account, have for more than a millennium.
And for the Ukrainians and the Europeans, it is about demonstrating that nations that seize land by force are not ultimately rewarded for their aggression — and deterring Russia from attempting another invasion.
This account of how the U.S. peace plan touched off a firestorm in the United States and Europe is based on interviews with a half-dozen officials, most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss private conversations.
By any measure, the administration’s rollout of the new plan was maladroit at best. The White House was taken by surprise by the leak of its details, first described by Axios. Mr. Rubio downplayed the proposal last Wednesday as “a list of potential ideas,” while Mr. Trump, Vice President JD Vance and Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, embraced it.
The leak left the European allies angry about being left out, yet again. Ukrainians who had been courting Mr. Trump, hoping to stabilize the relationship with Washington and re-establish a pipeline of American-made, European-purchased weapons, were angry; Mr. Zelensky said the country might have to choose between its “dignity” and its most powerful ally.
Mr. Trump attacked the Ukrainians on social media on Sunday, the same day Mr. Rubio was trying to win them over by amending the agreement.
Now, after a weekend of emergency interventions, an amended plan seems to be coming a bit more into focus, even if its ultimate success seems like a stretch.
On Monday, Ms. Leavitt insisted that after Mr. Rubio’s negotiations in Geneva, “we feel as if we’re in a very good place.” But she acknowledged that the deal would need to be approved by Mr. Putin and his representatives — and she made no predictions about how that would go.
Mr. Zelensky said on social media that many of the “right elements” were now accounted for in the framework, and that he would discuss “the sensitive issues” with Mr. Trump.
Administration officials say the impetus for the new negotiations grew from Mr. Trump’s increasing frustration about his inability to end a nearly four-year-long war.
Shortly after the Gaza cease-fire deal in September, Mr. Trump held a meeting with Mr. Rubio, along with Mr. Vance; Steve Witkoff, the president’s special envoy for just about everything; and Jared Kushner, Mr. Trump’s son-in-law, who has no formal role in the U.S. government but whom the president relies on for complex negotiations.
Mr. Trump told the men that they should seek to build on their accomplishment in the Middle East with a deal for Ukraine and Russia. That led to secret meetings in Miami with Kirill Dmitriev, Mr. Putin’s Harvard-trained economic envoy and the head of Russia’s sovereign wealth fund. That meeting was followed by a quiet visit from Rustem Umerov, Mr. Zelensky’s national security adviser.
People familiar with those meetings said Mr. Trump’s aides believed that the combination of Ukraine’s unfolding corruption scandal and Russia’s incremental battlefield gains put new pressure on Mr. Zelensky to cut a deal. But the one they ultimately drafted contained a lot more input from the Russians than from the Ukrainians.
“We began almost three weeks ago with a foundational document that we socialized and ran by both sides, and with input from both sides,” Mr. Rubio told reporters in Geneva.
And then, naturally, it leaked. The specifics outraged the Europeans, who had been kept in the dark even though they are funding Ukraine’s arms and designing a security guarantee for the country. Chancellor Friedrich Merz of Germany had a tense phone call with Mr. Trump on Friday night, emphasizing that the proposed agreement lacked any enforceable way of deterring the Russians.
“If Ukraine loses this war and possibly collapses, it will have an impact on European politics as a whole, on the entire European continent,” Mr. Merz said after the Group of 20 summit in Johannesburg, which Mr. Trump and other American officials boycotted.
Republican leaders were equally blistering about the leaked proposal, including Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the former majority leader, who said in a statement that “Putin has spent the entire year trying to play President Trump for a fool.”
In Kyiv, the secretary of the U.S. Army, Daniel P. Driscoll, a friend of Mr. Vance’s, presented the proposal to skeptical Ukrainian officials. Mr. Vance, who berated Mr. Zelensky in February in the Oval Office and has pushed hard for withdrawing U.S. aid from Ukraine, spoke with Ukraine’s leader by phone on Friday about the proposal.
By Saturday, Mr. Rubio was in damage-control mode. He headed to Geneva to meet with Ukrainian and European officials. Mr. Witkoff, Mr. Kushner and Mr. Driscoll also flew there.
While Mr. Trump had embraced the proposed deal as the near-final word, Mr. Rubio was talking about it as an opening gambit.
From his plane to Switzerland, he called Senator Mike Rounds, Republican of South Dakota, and Jeanne Shaheen, Democrat of New Hampshire, who were leading a bipartisan delegation to a security conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and talked at length about the origins of the 28-point proposal.
The senators then held a news conference, and told reporters that they heard Mr. Rubio describe the document as one largely composed by the Russians, rather than as an American creation. “It is not our recommendation,” Mr. Rounds paraphrased Mr. Rubio as saying. “It is not our peace plan.”
Mr. Rounds said Mr. Rubio had “made it clear that it was an opportunity to have received” the plan. “You now have one side being presented, and the opportunity for the other side to respond,” Mr. Rounds said.
When their comments were reported, it seemed like confirmation that the Russians had played a major role in composing the language. Suddenly, Mr. Rubio found himself denying that he had ever told the senator that the document was essentially a Russian draft. He called back to Mr. Rounds, and others, insisting that they had misinterpreted his remarks.
But he soon confirmed that the drafting began with a weighing of Russian demands.
“We began from the early stage of this process with our understanding of the Russian position as had been communicated to us in numerous ways,” he said in Geneva on Sunday. He said that included verbal and informal written proposals sent to the State Department that are called “nonpapers.” He insisted the same was done with the Ukrainians, though it is unclear when that happened.
By Sunday night Mr. Rubio appeared to have wrestled back control of the negotiations.
He excised — for now — sections that would forever bar Ukraine from joining NATO and that banned NATO member states from forming a security force inside Ukraine that would deter Russia from launching a new invasion.
A White House official added that a previous provision requiring Ukraine to cede territory to Russia had been revised. But now comes the hard part: Those are exactly the provisions that Mr. Putin cares about most.
Russia experts have assessed that there are no signs yet that Mr. Putin is ready to end the full-scale invasion of Ukraine he started in February 2022, or that he would abide by a permanent cease-fire. Mr. Putin has rejected every immediate cease-fire proposal offered by Mr. Trump this year.
The fighting, meanwhile, has continued. Early Tuesday, loud explosions were heard across Ukraine’s capital early, with the local authorities saying air defenses were firing to fend off a large Russian attack.
@lowfour wrote in post #285:
El NYT dice que el Rubio intenta desesperadamente retomar el control del proceso de las manos del incompetente/corrupto Witkoff. Rory y Allastair también destacan eso... la aparición de "diplomáticos ...
lo del vexler mosquea por el reflexive control que nos cuela a cada rato, como que las democracias europeas les falta "audacia" (qué cojones es eso?), que son "grises" o algo así... pojclaro
luego llega la paine y te cuenta que europa anda en su senda "marítima" expandiendo sus redes y usa ha tornado su rumbo en "continental" (autárquico) y choca con el claro devenir de la historia o algo así
en fin, volviendo al tema, el nytruchen parece que sigue dando palos de ciego, aunque tiene pinta de que están tratando de reconducir el "relato", no solo de los 28 truños, sino del desbarajuste de administración o algo así
ayer lo pusiste, lo dijo el freedman en su substrack, alguien filtró el mamoneo que se traían el witkoff y el dimitrev, posiblemente para "elevarlo" a oficial o algo así... y les funcionó, se lo tomaron en serio
el wetnoodel no sabía nada, rubio no sabía nada o peor, lo devolvió al cajón y dijo que eso era basura, hasta que llegó el ojostiznaos (y yo me huelo que gabbarovna anda por medio, no eres la jefa de la cia y estás ausente en mierdas de estas)
ahora tratan de controlar los daños, porque en europa hemos tenido que salir a apoyar a ucrania y a "separarnos" de la mierda esa ciberputi (porque no es trucha, no parte del witkoff, parte de los ruskis y es, por tanto, parte de la estrategia de desestabilización política), lo dice el calvo danes, que esto es un torpedo en las relaciones usa-eu, y luego añade que es el fallo de la política ue de apaciguamiento o algo así (yo no estoy de acuerdo), pero lo explicó muy guay al describir la estrategia win-win-win de la compra y cesión de armas a ucrania y tal
así que aquí andamos, tratando de hacer control de daños, y ya veremos si no sale rubio quemado de esta... quemado porque desautoriza a un witkoff que es coleguita del culicagao, quien tuvo la mala cabeza de dar un ultimatum (fijo que se lo recomendó la gabbarovna en un briefing de esos) que le dejó vendido (porque no tiene forma de ganarlo, así que le dejará en ridículo) y que activó a toda la diplomacia europea que andaba de reuniones en africa con lo del g20 y los acuerdos africa-ue
por cierto, no estamos hablando que han ido 27 jefes de estado a angola a firmar acuedos AFRICA-UE
casi se nos pasa de largo lo de vonderleyen en indonesia (cuarto país por población) firmando acuerdos también, ahora están todos, TODOS, en africa
tú no crees que es mucha casualidad??
pero es que venían de esto
y qué ha pasao?? por qué no sale en prensa apenas?
de hecho, por qué no ha pillao al trucho supremo en sudafrica toda la movida con el witkoff??
que yo creo que el trucho no fue porque allí se hablaba de cambio climático, comercio multilateral y... en fin, todas esas cosas "woke" o algo así, vamos, estaban en modo "marítimo" total y el trucho ya es "continental" o algo así
pero no me jodais que no cuadran los tiempos? todo dios en africa y el trucho diciendo a zelensky que tiene una semana para rendirse
Bueno, es nuestro belt and road initiative, necesitamos tierras raras y no se las vamos a dar todas a los chinos
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/sanctions-choked-russia-oil-industry-a-key-source-of-kremlin-funds/
A Treasury Department analysis indicates that new U.S. sanctions on Russian oil producers have sent prices there tumbling, choking off a key revenue source that Russia has used to fund its war in Ukraine, the department said.
One key benchmark for Russian oil prices — Urals crude — had fallen by at least 21% since a set of new sanctions were announced last month, a Treasury official said Thursday. The official also pointed to a decrease in the amount of oil departing from Russia to unknown destinations and said transaction volume has decreased.
The sanctions, announced Oct. 22, target Russian oil giants Lukoil and Rosneft. They represent the first direct actions against Russia of the second Trump administration and some of the most aggressive since Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine began in February 2022. Since the announcement, nearly a dozen major Indian and Chinese purchasers of Russian oil have stated intentions to pause their purchases of Russian oil deliveries for December, Treasury has said.
A November 17 memo from the Treasury's Sanctions Economic Analysis Division assessed that the "sanctions on Russian energy firms Lukoil and Rosneft are having their intended effect of dampening Russian revenues by lowering the price of Russian oil and therefore the country's ability to fund its war effort against Ukraine."
The memo said that several grades of Russian oil are trading at multi-year lows, and are "well below all other international prices."
The memo also indicated that sanctions are "likely to have a long-term negative impact on the quantity of Russian oil sold."
The sanctions set a Friday, Nov. 21, deadline for companies to wind down dealings with Rosneft and Lukoil. Nearly three dozen entities are petitioning Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control for additional time to wind down operations, which would take them beyond the original deadline. That is not unusual, as companies work to comply with U.S. sanctions.
Treasury has issued some extensions already for certain transactions involving Lukoil's retail service stations and contracts for the sale of the firm's international assets until Dec. 13. A separate waiver for deals pertaining to Lukoil's entities in Bulgaria was extended through April 29, according to a CBS review of the licenses.
A Treasury official also said Thursday that many Chinese and Indian entities — including banks and refineries — are conscious of the sanctions and are "risk averse, do recognize the importance of the relationships with the West, and are moving to comply."
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said last month the sanctions on Russia's largest oil companies were driven by President Vladimir Putin's "refusal to end this senseless war." Treasury said the companies have helped to "fund the Kremlin's war machine."
Last month on CBS News' "Face the Nation," Bessent told moderator Margaret Brennan that the latest actions could cut Russia's oil revenue 20% or 30%. A Treasury official said the impacts are still being assessed, but that "it is clear that there will be revenue impacts" from the sanctions.
The oil price plunge comes as President Trump presses Russia and Ukraine to reach a ceasefire. At various points, he has expressed frustration with the leaders of both countries.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy's office confirmed Thursday he had received a draft peace plan from the U.S.
che, entre los hermanos calatrava, el vexler, calvo danés y el del tambor, al final triangulamos un poco el tema este y parece que vamos sacando conclusiones
imagino que en los cuarteles generales del cni y tal ya van varios pasos adelantados sobre todo esto (o vete a saber, lo mismo al que han puesto para informar de estas cosas se pasa por aquí a ver si le aclaramos algo, jajaja!!)
supongo que han valorado lo de los gripen y los eurofighters y han dicho... mejor no, vamos a dejar que se cuezan un poco más, además, eso es un lío logístico de quetecagas y hay que laminar a los truchos igualmente
es que pasa una cosa, los ruskis están en bancarrota, pero los truchos andan como pollo sin cabeza y van por el mismo camino siniestro
es como si en francia y tal hubieran dicho, hay que mantener al trucho todo lo que podamos en modo "rey desnudo", o sea, todo dios sabe que el rey está desnudo, pero callar logra una ventaja estratégica o algo así
todos sabemos que mantener la otan en marcha no es porque rusia sea una amenaza, no lo es
quizá la amenaza es otra, igual china, los barbudos talibanes o los jeques petroleros o algo así
lo digo porque el trucho les va a vender f35 a los jeques...
lo mismo la cortina de humo no es venezuela (o no solo) sino que están creando otro actor geopolitico de primer nivel que sustituya al putin o algo así, o que genere otra zona no-go o algo así
en fin, igual solo es lo que decíamos esta mañana, que unos mataos trapicheando para ser complacientes con sus jefes, han desencadenado una especie de propuesta de paz que solo era un informe para quedar bien o algo así que se les ha ido de las manos
o puede que sea algo más complejo que no entendemos porque está diseñado para distraernos del verdadero objetivo
@elarquitecto wrote in post #290:
che, entre los hermanos calatrava, el vexler, calvo danés y el del tambor, al final triangulamos un poco el tema este y parece que vamos sacando conclusionesimagino que en los cuarteles generales del ...
A mi lo que me tiene loco es el Zelensky. No solo está aguantando una invasión por un país enorme, que tenía decenas de miles de tanques y de todo, y nukes. También está toreando con "aliados" que le apuñalan por la espalda. Cualquier otro habría dicho, que le den por culo, me piro o me vuelo los sesos. Este tío es un héroe, igual corrupto por su entorno no se sabe, pero lo que está claro es que tiene dos huevos como dos cántaros.
Que stress, y lo que NO SABEMOS!!!!, Lo que no leemos, y el tío está aguantando ahí carros y carretas... por eso mismo, por no ser un cobarde y un mierda como Trump y Putin, acabará ganando.
os traduzco (un poco, que esto ya es como kafkiano todo, con toques de berlanga, sin duda):
han apartado al wetnoodel de todo esto, no van a dejar que se acerque ni zelensky, ni ninguno de los europeos (especialmente macron o el de finlandia), la última vez salió el culicagao diciendo que rusia iba a tener que renunciar a conquistas territoriales o algo así
y bueno, tampoco entiendo por qué se reunen en abu dabi, si estaban en ginebra o algo así
me da que todo esto es lo de "control de daños" para no mostrarse como los inútiles que son, tras el ultimatum de mierda del trucho jefe, que no podía ser aceptado y que dejaba a los gringos como los lacayos del gnomo (que ya lo sabemos, pero era como descarao)
eso no lo ha escrito el trucho
ha sido el miller o alguno de esos
esa firma no es la habitual y el texto es muy formal, parece casi generado por ia
por cierto, a este paso, un día de estos irá el trucho o alguien con una mierda de esta, y el zelensky y vonderleyen y tal dirán, que te pires, que molestas
o sea, el papel de usa ahora mismo es tan marginal, que por eso el ultimatum ha sido más destructivo para el truchinato que para ucrania-zelensky (y mira que hubo campañita ciberputi diciendo que zelensky estaba más débil que nunca y mierdas así), porque ha revelado que usa es un socio mierdoso y pro-genocida (ya lo comentamos ayer, es un escandalazo que usa tenga este nivel de compadreo con el putinato, que es genocida... pero claro, como venimos de la turra ciberputi-belarriana de gaza... qué bien les ha venido a los ruskis lo de gaza, eh? han perdido siria y los de iran andan acojonaos, pero rusia ahora es tan genocida como israel... venganomejodas)
yo creo que han intentado puentear también a la ue, aprovechando que estaban en africa (igual se pensaban que no llega el wifi ahí o algo así), pero han medido mal los tiempos y que no son tan lentos como nos los pintan
ahora andan intentando controlar los daños
y que a rusia le interesa parar, porque están en bancarrota
así que lo mismo aceptan algo, pero tiene pinta de que los ruskis van a pasar de firmar nada (lo dijo el vexler, creo)
Los rusos han tirado a dar contra USA, contra la EU y contra Ucrania. Su objetivo, no lo olvidemos, es demostrar que NATO y USA ya no pintan y que Rusia es un poder de primer orden (no lo son, son una puta mierda pinchada en un palo). Con la filtración esa del McKinsey (consultor tenía que ser el Kiril, menudo hijodeputa con pintas) han conseguido casi las tres cosas. Que USA quede como mierda, que NATO ni exista, que la EU se cague y que Zelensky se encuentre en una posición aún más precaria (al menos en los medios).
Yo veo aquí MUCHA prisa, MUCHO acojone y no precisamente ukro. Qué han anunciado hoy? Que MÁS fábricas de armamento europeo para Ucrania.
Vamos, que los otros rebuznen
PA CAERSE DE CULO, alta traición. Ojo que el Witkoff es étnicamente ruso por parte de abuelos!!!!!
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/1p6mwme/witkoffadvisedrussiaonhowtopitch_ukraine/
comentario de reddit:
If Witkoff is involved, then expect Ukraine to be thrown under the bus and simultaneously witkoff's and trump's family becoming richer by millions if not billions .
According to Former US NSA Jack Sullivan, who has served under Obama , Biden , Hillary Clinton "Trump has thrown ties with India over the side" under the advise of Steve witkoff for his Business interests in Pakistan.
All Russia has to do is invest money in Trump , Witkoff, kushner and the they will get the desired deal.
pero tú crees que el wifkoff, él solo, va a tener tanta influencia??
no
ahí pasan más cosas
una de ellas es que el presidente de los estados unidos, el mismísimo POTUS, TIENE DEMENCIA y por eso tiene la misma opinión y hasta imita el vestuario del último que le habla
piénsalo, estamos todos aquí con que wetnoodle nosequé, el trumpismos nosecuantos, el maga... y nos estamos perdiendo que el tipo que encarna todo eso perdió la chaveta hace meses, que harán todo lo que puedan para mantenerle ahí mientras no sea evidente que chochea
mientras, trincan todo lo que pueden y más
y sí, se alinean con los ruskis, porque pagan y porque los ruskis son el espejo donde se miran, el estado a imitar (de hombres fuertes que si se ponen, invaden un país y se lo quedan)
es que tenían un presidente, un potus, no cualquier presindente, pillado por casos de corrupción, lista epstein, lo de los archivos top secret, etc
una marioneta que tenía detrás todo un conglomerado mediático, amplificado por granjas de ciberputis y ketaminikos que toquetean el algoritmo y deja campar a sus anchas los mensajes fachirulos y tal
el tipo solo tenía que leer el teleprompter, que es lo que mejor sabe hacer, y no liarse mucho con las salidas del guión, fijo que el pinganillo le echaba humo cuando pasaba
al final, el tipo resulta que tiene una demencia frontotemporal (como el bruce willis) y dentro de poco no sabrá ni subir escaleras sin mearse encima o algo así
yo veo aquí las prisas (aparte de que putin esté jodiendo la economía ruski, pero no es urgente, solo importante)
mira, forbes nos lee
diplomacia bien, pero mejor con gripen y eurofighters creando zonas de exclusión aérea
Please log in to reply to this discussion.
Log In