Putin backs China's Ukraine peace plan, says Beijing understands the conflict | Reuters (www.reuters.com)

submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by Amoxtli@thelemmy.club to c/world@lemmy.world

16 comments fedilink hide all child comments

top 16 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old

[-] SuddenDownpour@sh.itjust.works 39 points 5 months ago

From China's 12 points peace plan:

Respecting the sovereignty of all countries. Universally recognized international law, including the purposes and principles of the United Nations Charter, must be strictly observed. The sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of all countries must be effectively upheld.

Russia unilaterally decided that territories that everyone had agreed were Ukrainian were now theirs. Truly agreeing to China's peace plan would mean returning everything, including Donetsk, Lugansk and Crimea. I don't think anyone here is naive enough to believe this declaration was serious in any way or form.

[+] wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world -23 points 5 months ago

https://uwidata.com/25911-natos-pledges-in-documents-not-to-expand-eastward/

[-] rusticus@lemm.ee 15 points 5 months ago

From your own link: “None of NATO’s pledges to the leaders of the Soviet Union have been written down in any agreement, signed by the two parties and codified.”

[+] wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world -10 points 5 months ago

Shame you didn't read the rest of it:

*“Here even studies acknowledging that U.S. policymakers in February 1990 briefly discussed limits on NATO’s future presence risk understating the significance of U.S.-Soviet bargaining in 1990 by missing the importance of informal deals to politics, in general, and to Cold War diplomacy, in particular. In U.S. domestic politics, for example, an informal offer can constitute a binding agreement provided one party gives up something of value in consideration of payment in goods or services. A similar principle applies to inter- national politics: not only are formal agreements often the codiacation of arrangements that states would make regardless of a formal offer, but if private and unwritten discussions are meaningless, then diplomacy itself would be an unnecessary and fruitless exercise.

Moreover, informal agreements and understandings were especially important during the Cold War. The 1962 Cuban missile crisis, for example, was re- solved in part through an informal agreement whereby the United States and the Soviet Union each removed missiles near the other’s territory. In the 1970s and 1980s, an unofficial alliance developed between the United States and China, as each turned to the other to balance Soviet ambitions in Europe and Asia. And as Marc Trachtenberg shows, Europe’s Cold War or- der emerged from tacit U.S. and Soviet initiatives in the 1950s and 1960s that helped the two sides and ways to coexist within a divided Europe. Ultimately, informal arrangements abounded during the Cold War as the United States and the Soviet Union competed for power, influence, and security.”(Shifrinson, Deal or No Deal?: The End of the Cold War and the U.S. Offer to Limit NATO Expansion, p. 18)*

[-] rusticus@lemm.ee 10 points 5 months ago

lol we get it comrade. You’re butthurt the leader of the USSR (which AGAIN doesn’t exist anymore) didn’t get a deal in writing. Hilarious that of all countries, RUSSIA is crying because they think it’s “not fair”. When has Russia ever kept its word, ESPECIALLY with Ukraine. Go back to your delusional echo chamber you will find no support here.

[-] wurzelgummidge@lemmy.world -3 points 5 months ago

The only reason you are this angry is because you know I'm right. But I guess it must get tiresome having American thrown in your face everyday. Never mind, eh? Chin up and straighten your MAGA hat

[-] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Next time you can just say, "You're right." when someone is right.

[-] rusticus@lemm.ee 13 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Hey Russian asshole. First, the agreement was with a country that no longer exists (USSR). Do we need to respect territorial agreements with ancient empires? Second, if a sovereign nation ASKS to be a part of NATO peacefully for its protection you think NATO should refuse because you’re butthurt you can’t go invade that country? Hopefully every country in the world joins NATO except Russia China N Korea and Iran. You can then all rot with each other.

[-] Reddfugee42@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago

That's abuser talk.

"I didn't want to kill her but she had the audacity to buy a handgun after years of my shitty behavior."

See how that sounds?

[-] BombOmOm@lemmy.world 20 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Unless China's plan is for Russia to leave Ukraine, I have a strong feeling it isn't going to work out.

In unrelated news, Russian occupied Belbek Airfield is on fire, with reported losses of Russian combat aircraft, an air-defense radar, and two S-400 anti-air missile launchers.

[-] ghostdoggtv@lemmy.world 10 points 5 months ago

If Ukraine losing territory is a valid conclusion to the conflict then NATO should invade Moscow today.

[-] Brunbrun6766@lemmy.world 4 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

https://www.reuters.com/world/putin-backs-chinas-ukraine-peace-plan-says-beijing-understands-conflict-2024-05-15/ Not sure what broke in your link but here's a different one

[-] Amoxtli@thelemmy.club -1 points 5 months ago

Already fixed.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Link to the source is dead.

[-] Amoxtli@thelemmy.club -3 points 5 months ago

Source link has been updated for your pleasure.

[-] Badeendje@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

Much appreciated kind sir

this post was submitted on 15 May 2024

29 points (79.6% liked)

World News

38914 readers

2242 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.

Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world

Recommendations

How to spot Misinformation and Propaganda

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

quinten@lemmy.world

NewsAutoMod@lemmy.world

jordanlund@lemmy.world

Tenthrow@lemmy.world

little_cow@lemmy.world

lemmyAtom@lemmy.world

FlyingSquid@lemmy.world