President Trump’s rancorous threat to abandon Ukraine is stoking support for a long-debated proposal to use billions of dollars in frozen Russian assets to buy weapons for Ukraine and finance its reconstruction.

The money — roughly $300 billion owned by Russia’s central bank — was frozen by the United States, the European Union, Britain and others after Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022. The aim was to punish President Vladimir V. Putin for his unprovoked attack and to cut off funds he could use to wage war.

As the war grinds on into its fourth year, a growing number of officials in Europe and elsewhere have been calling for the money to be released to directly compensate Ukraine.

MBFC
Archive

  • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    Well because every war ends with a peace treaty. Ignoring that fact now and making it harder to do so in the future just because a peace treaty isn’t viable now.

    All I’m arguing for is making decisions while aware of all the factors? I don’t understand what you’re disagreeing with, really

    • meliante@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’m not sure you’re just being stubborn or really believe that peace treaty crap. War ends one one of the sides is forced into submission and surrender.

      Yet you wanna call that a peace treaty like it’s some agreement reached at any time that is not short of annihilating the other guys. At least recently. But, throughout history, many wars ended with the actual annihilation of the other side so now you know what I’m disagreeing with.

      If not, what I’m disagreeing with for this case is diplomacy and negotiations. Fuck that and fuck Russia and the USA. Use the money to let Ukraine go berserk.

      • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 days ago

        66% of wars end in some form of compromise (source), and it’s highly unlikely there’s a scenario where Ukraine causes the total collapse of the Russian government, or that the fighting just naturally dies down.

        It’s all well and good to say “no peace with the bad guys” but that’s a position you’re taking because you don’t want to negotiate with Russia, not because doing so necessarily achieves the best outcome for Ukraine. “They’re mean so I won’t do any form of diplomacy” is, frankly, dogshit statecraft.

        If you want to actually understand how wars do, and specifically the Ukraine war could actually end, I strongly recommend reading that CSIS report I referenced.

        • meliante@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          13 hours ago

          Mate, why are you insisting in a verifiably failed strategy? It has been done. It has not worked.

          This is one of the cases where compromises will not work.

          Why the fuck are you ignoring that? Why? Why are you pressing on “talks” with Russia? You fucking sound like trump. What is your interest? Do you think that selling their sovereignty is acceptable? Because that’s what the USA and Russia want.

          Fuck off! We’re never going to agree so you might as well just leave it.

          • xor@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            12 hours ago

            Jesus Christ man. All I said was “it’s possible there will be some form of peace treaty someday” and you’re acting like I shat in your cereal.

            Stop being an arse.

            Edit: and don’t call people mate before ranting at them. I’m not your friend.