this post was submitted on 02 Apr 2025
43 points (97.8% liked)
World News
2573 readers
86 users here now
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Well, if I recall correctly, the original terms at the beginning of the war were significantly more favourable: Ukraine could pursue EU membership with no pushback, No NATO, and I don't even think Russia was going to absorb the eastern territories back then, just that they either had autonomy or whatever they wanted (maybe there were calls for more negotiations on that front but I cannot remember).
But this is what happens when you continue the war and even threaten to “make Russia small again” (Zelenskyy wore a shirt with that statement), the terms have changed after all this time, too much goodwill has been squandered. No way was Russia just going to take it on the chin and roll over. It makes me incredibly sad but what did anyone expect?
Edit: also, don't those territories want to join Russia now? I believe initially they were only looking for autonomy, but after years of bombings and protection from Russia they’d rather be absorbed now. I could be entirely wrong of course.
This is the key question liberals have to answer. How is Ukraine better off after three years of war than it would've been if they took the deal two week in.