Ich bin nicht so gut über die ganze Situation informiert wie andere Leute hier, aber ich versuche mein Bestes, sie zu verstehen.
Meine Frage ist: Was denken Sie, wäre ein Friedensabkommen wie in Ostdeutschland eine Möglichkeit, bei dem die Ukraine der NATO beitritt, sich aber bereit erklärt, keine NATO-Truppen oder -Waffen in ihrem Land zu stationieren und somit für den Fall der Zukunft unter dem Schutz der NATO zu stehen? Russische Angriffe, aber nicht die Erfüllung der Behauptungen Russlands, von den sogenannten bedroht zu sein "NATO-Erweiterung"? Was denkst du, würde Russland denken?
https://i.redd.it/t1mx1tq5319e1.jpeg
3 Comments
What you quote is widely recognized as a false claim.
https://amp.dw.com/en/fact-check-no-nato-presence-does-not-breach-german-law/a-70522943
Does it matter when Russia has lost the war and collapse. If Russia keep fighting like today it will take 20 years for Russia to take Ukraine. Russia is about to collapse and will lose the war when they collapse. There is no way back their economy is totally destroyed. The funny thing is that they think they are a “big power” a big power that geta it’s as kicked by its micro neighbor getting old guns from Nato 🤣 They lost Syria and is about to lose Georgia and the Ruble
russia already thinks NATO is too keen on Ukraine. A “compromise” like this would not change that opinion.
This conflict is not about territory or resources, though those do play a role. This conflict is due to Russia believing Ukraine and all of eastern Europe is part of Russia for various cultural and historical reasons, no ifs ands or buts.
Putin (and Russia) are the abusive toxic ex. They believe eastern Europe is theirs by right, to be controlled by might if necessary even if/after the relationship ends (and even if there was never a relationship to start with).
If Ukraine has NATO as a coworker instead of a date, that doesn’t change the fact that russia will see that as an existential threat worth a confrontation.