Summary

Advisers to Donald Trump acknowledge that resolving the Ukraine war could take months, contradicting Trump’s campaign pledge of a “Day One” peace deal.

Trump’s incoming envoy, Keith Kellogg, suggested a 100-day target, but analysts consider even that timeline overly optimistic.

Russia has shown limited interest in proposed peace plans, and Trump’s team is contemplating freezing battle lines and offering Ukraine security guarantees.

Progress has been slow, hampered by diplomatic complexities and legal concerns, such as Kellogg postponing a pre-inauguration Kyiv visit due to the Logan Act.

  • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    edit-2
    6 hours ago

    Literally everyone who didn’t vote for Trump was saying this lol

    The fact that Trump might be considering security guarantees is honestly kinda promising, though. Letting Ukraine into nato would be the single best broken clock moment this decade. I don’t think russia will be in a position to accept that within 100 days, but we can hope.

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

      Russia cant afford to end the war, their economy is locked into war mode. Ukraine in NATO was like, one of the only war goal preventions that they never lied about

      Russia will never, ever agree to it without a gun to its head. the only way it will ever happen is if NATO threatens “accept it, or we go to war”

    • LibertyLizard@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      I think a lot of people might not realize how strategically constrained international relations are. There are only so many possible solutions to this conflict and Trump’s incompetence or malevolence can only interfere to a certain extent. Especially when others within the government who are negotiating this deal have real interests in protecting Ukraine.

      That said, I think the most likely outcome is no deal but we’ll see.

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

        I’ve been following this conflict since the very beginning Euromaidan

        I have been saying for the last couple years. there is frankly only one scenario where the fighting stops, peace holds, and violence doesn’t escalate somewhere else in Eurasia because of it.

        September 2022 was the point of no return, any prospect of Russia taking an offramp and everyone going back to a bitter status quo ante-bellum was closed forever by the end of the month. during that month we saw the formal annexation of 4 oblasts. and we also saw the Russians suffer a major defeat and their professional army was in full retreat in the north. They had the opportunity to call it a day, instead on the 22nd, they started a mobilization. that was the end. Now, after that point, the conflict only ends for good in one way

        Ukraine joins NATO, Ukraine surrenders the occupied territory formally. Everyone is mad, everyone gets something they want. This is the only scenario I see that will work, and its a bitter one Dont get me wrong, I’m a self admitted psycho who would be perfectly fine with the collapse, balkanization and occupation of the russian federation, but it isnt going to happen, the US is terrified of the prospect of having to deal with the russian nuclear arsenal being fought over,

        all other scenarios are as follows.

        Fighting continues with no end in sight. Until either

        **A1 - Russia collapses internally, and then the world has to deal with Russian civil war, *a catastrophic scenario, and the leading reason NATO never went whole-hog on Ukraine support… Result - Further, even worse violence in the east. Probable nuclear exchange as ultranationalist blood drunk Russian factions fight each other, and foreign intervention forces

        A2 - Ukraine falls, Ukraine turns into a european afghanistan as “The hard part” begins, an insurgency more heavily armed than most standing armies. An apocalyptic humanitarian and refugee crisis. And honestly, Shooting probably starts between Russia and Europe. whether it be Europe Intervenes, or Russia decides to push further. Result - Further, even worse violence in the west. Probable nuclear exchange as WW3 starts in earnest** We’re already in WW3, btw

        B Or a “ceasefire” is signed, without any concrete assurances to Ukraine, in which case, many western countries use it as an excuse to finally decouple from the country, and in 5-10 years, Russia attacks again, as Russian treaties are only good for wiping your ass, and we’re right back into A1 or A2. The fighting goes until the Russians collapse, or the Ukrainian state falls.

        Ukraine doesn’t have the strength to dislodge russia from the donbass anymore, or crimea, and even if they did, the area is effectively colonized, anyone who was loyal to ukraine was murdered or evicted. now whats left of the donbass is just a depopulated shadow where a bunch of pragmatists, traitors, and new arrivals moving from russia setting up shop are. the people who live there mostly hate the Ukrainian government, and the Ukrainian people hate the people who live there. It’s largely acknowledged by the people of both sides that they can never be together again. regardless of what politicians in Kyiv, Moscow, Brussels or DC say.

        The only way they’d be forced out is by NATO participation, and just go back to one of the scenarios that results in direct conflict.

    • Rolder@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      I would want to see what caveats a nato peace deal comes with. I will bet it’s like “Ukraine gives up the territory Russia is currently occupying”

      • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        5 hours ago

        I think most of the western analysts think that this would be a possible compromise. Allowing Russia to hold Crimea and donbass, at least defacto, and Ukraine joins nato to prevent further incursion by Russia.

          • Justin@lemmy.jlh.name
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            Yeah, I think current polling shows that 60% of Ukrainians would be against such a deal, but 30% is also not far off from a majority.

            Worth keeping in mind that Putin’s wargoals continue to be the puppeting of all of Ukraine, and he would not accept Ukrainian NATO membership, either.

            Good analysis on the current state of the war:

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vf2vSoWsmgI

            The “What limits ukraine” section discusses the war support polling in Ukraine.

  • Tattorack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    7 hours ago

    “As soon as I become president, I can make a peace deal that’ll have the war in Ukrainian solved within 24 hours”.

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

    Who cares? Trump’s ‘peace deal’ will be trying to convince Zelenskyy that he should relinquish eastern Ukraine to end the war.

    It’s up to the UK and the EU to support them now. I’m sorry. Many of my countrymen are the fucking worst.

  • AbidanYre@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    7 hours ago

    Trump’s solution of “give Putin whatever he wants” wasn’t very appealing to the Ukrainians.

  • Hemingways_Shotgun
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    7 hours ago

    TIL “Adviser” isn’t actually a misspelling of “Advisor” but an actual legitimate alternative spelling.

    I was all ready to come in here and rake Reuters for such a basic error, but figured (as I usually do) that I should check my facts before making an ass of myself. Good thing I did…

    • casmael@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      5 hours ago

      Apparently adviser is more common in the uk, which makes sense as Reuters is headquartered in London apparently. Spelling is silly anyway do whatever u want m8