"Under its terms, Ukraine would face no meaningful limit on its peacetime military, despite Russian attempts to impose draconian restrictions since 2022. (The only requirement, a cap of 600,000 personnel, probably exceeds the number of active-duty forces Ukraine would maintain anyway.) Moreover, Ukraine would receive a substantial security guarantee from the United States and Europe the strongest in history, even if short of a Nato-style commitment."
"When the fighting stops, Ukraine will be militarily stronger, more hostile to Russia, and better protected than ever before. Yet it is already clear that this outcome, if and when it may be realized, will be deemed unacceptable and immoral by powerful voices in Washington, Republican and Democrat alike. Continuing the war indefinitely is highly likely to leave Ukraine worse off smaller, weaker, and even more devastated but that won't keep senators such as Mitch McConnell or Jeanne Shaheen from railing against a least-bad compromise."
A proposed 28-point plan would allow Ukraine to retain a large peacetime military, with only a 600,000-person cap that likely exceeds actual needs, while securing unprecedented U.S. and European security guarantees short of NATO membership. Russia's invasion aimed to sever Ukraine's Western alignment, but a ceasefire could leave Ukraine militarily stronger, more hostile to Russia, and better protected. Powerful U.S. voices across parties are likely to condemn a compromised settlement as immoral. Prolonging the war risks leaving Ukraine smaller, weaker, and more devastated, while American political moralizing may prevent pragmatic acceptance of imperfect but strategic outcomes.
Read at www.theguardian.com
Unable to calculate read time
Collection
[
|
...
]