more Ukraine research and thoughts.

[Mark Kohut]

https://images.search.yahoo.com/search/images;_ylt=AwrJ7FbwyfFh1KIAXzVXNyoA;_ylu=Y29sbwNiZjEEcG9zAzIEdnRpZANQSFhTWUNDXzEEc2VjA3Nj?p=mic+drop&fr=aaplw

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 5:16 PM Martin Dietze <mdietze at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 26 Jan 2022 at 22:07, Thomas Eckhardt <
> huebschraeuber at protonmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> > > After this blatant violation Minsk II was dead from day 1. Claiming
> that
> > > Ukraine were to fulfil their part now - as Moscow does - is utter
> > cynicism.
> >
> > This is a controversial claim.
>
>
> No, it is the ony correct one. Minsk II was destroyed by Russia one day
> after having been signed.
>
>
>
> > As you surely know but inexplicably fail
> > to mention, Debaltsevo was discussed in Minsk. Poroshenko did not admit
> > that his troops were surrounded and therefore saw no reason for them to
> > surrender:
> >
>
> He had no reason, because the agreement included an immediate ceasefire
> which Moscow ignored a day later.
>
>
>
> > As I understand it, Debaltsevo was therefore not included in the
> agreement.
> >
>
> It does not need to. It falls under the agreement as every other place in
> the region. It was not excluded. Hence, see above.
>
>
>
> > In any case, Minsk II is still valid, despite the events in Debaltsevo,
> > and there can be no doubt that Ukraine has not fulfilled its obligations
> > under the agreement. As you admit.
> >
>
> This is a twist worthy of Russia's propaganda factories. Once again, very
> slowly:
>
> 1. Minsk II was signed.
> 2. All sides agreed on an immediate ceasefire, no further gains, both sides
> stay where they are
> 3. Debaltsevo was under Ukrainian control then
> 4. Russia's proxies assisted by Russian troops started a vast offensive and
> eventually took the city cynically violating Minsk in several ways:
> - ceasefire ignored
> - not stayed where they were
> - massive involvement of regular Russian troops
> - massive use of banned heavy weapons (including the TOS-1 flame thrower
> launcher system burning everything to death in an area of square
> kilometers)
> 5. Hence: Minsk II was dead the day after its signing.
>
> Russia now blames Ukraine to not fulfil a particular part of Minsk II, the
> interpretation of which is controversial. Since Russia does not allow the
> border to be secured and international organisations assert an election (if
> it were to take place) to be carried out according to Ukrainian law (as
> required by the agreement) - parties having the right to agitate even if
> not "separatist", people having the right to vote freely and secretly - the
> disputed part of the agreement cannot be implemented anyway.
>
> But this is not even important anymore, because - see above - Minsk II had
> already been so blatantly violated already on day one that now insisting on
> one of the parties being the obstacle to implementing it is nothing but
> hypocrisy. Welcome to Putin's kindom of miracles and fairy tales.
>
> Sorry for sounding sarcastic, but us even discussing this here is nothing
> less than grotesque.
>
> Cheers,
>
> m.
> --
> Pynchon-L: https://waste.org/mailman/listinfo/pynchon-l
>