Hat der Gustav Gressel herausgefunden.
Im deutschen Kanzleramt:
While Scholz gave no official reasons, the author inquired from several sources that the German Chancellery thinks that Ukraine’s NATO status should not be decided until actual peace negotiations between Ukraine and Russia commence. In other words, they think that Ukraine putting its possible NATO membership on the table would be a bargaining chip in future negotiations and that Russia would indeed be interested in it. That, of course, is a misinterpretation.
src: click (to be fair - to take that at face value even is difficult for me)
In französisch geführten Gesprächen mit der Ukraine über die europäische Sicherheitsordnung:
Certainly, Russia was interested in Ukraine’s neutrality before its full-scale invasion. Under Victor Yanukovych’s presidency, backchannel negotiations on casting Ukraine’s neutrality into a new treaty on the European security order were conducted, with former French President Nicolas Sarkozy and an obscure collection of “experts” playing a role in the talks. As it was later discovered, the Austrian entrepreneur and Russian intelligence asset Jan Marsalek sponsored much of their activities. While there is no clear documentation of what had been discussed substantively between Sarkozy, Yanukovych, and Moscow, it is noteworthy that even then-Ukrainian President Yanukovych never agreed to open formal negotiations on the treaty ideas proposed to him.
(Ok fair, that does sound problematic, …)
In der US geführten Rand cooperation:
Another idea for a “new security order” based on a Ukrainian “neutrality”, crafted by the RAND Corporation, rested heavily on Russian ideas.4 The proposal foresaw “consensual institutions” that would determine the “acceptable behavior for major powers, their smaller alliance partners, and other states of the region to prevent future misunderstandings and conflicts.” In other words, great powers would preside over what kind of relations “in-betweens” could have with other countries and international organizations. This proposal represented an unprecedented infringement of state sovereignty, unseen before in European history. The authors of the RAND Corporation study went to great lengths to falsify Austrian history to justify this infringement.5 But they did not try to answer the question of what such infringement would mean operationally in the Russo-Ukrainian context. In fact, it would give Russia a tool to veto any Western support for Ukraine, whether it be assistance in carrying out democratic reforms, anti-corruption efforts, domestic security sector reforms, military reforms or, last but not least, delivering military hardware.
Im weißen Haus:
src: click
Nur Amerikaner in der Ukraine hat der Gressel leider keine gesehen:
On the contrary, since Bucharest 2008, opposition to bringing Ukraine into NATO had grown, including in the United States. The Obama administration, as part of its Reset policy with Russia, let the case rest. It was not NATO; it was Ukrainians daring to decide for themselves whom to govern them that infuriated the Kremlin. However, Kyiv’s sovereignty right to choose its leaders is not for sale.
src: click
Moment mal, wo schreibt der Gressel das eigentlich?
Ah: https://european-resilience.org/about-us
Fuck me, ist Gen. Ben Hodges eigentlich in jedem Verein der Deputy Chairperson at the Center for Defense Strategies in Ukraine, die Kommunikationsexperten hinter ukraine.ua (Since 2020, she has been working in the field of public and cultural diplomacy, including for such organisations as Ukrainian Institute and ukraine.ua.), member of Ukraine’s parliament and a Chairman of the Economic Affairs Committee und die Heinrich Böll Stiftung (expert in Eastern Europe. In 2015-2021, he worked as the director of the Heinrich Böll Foundation Bureau in Kyiv) zusammenbringt?
Wann war eigentlich der letzte Auftritt vom Gressel im ORF?
Ah, am 27.01.2025
Sehen sie, das ist diese allgegenwärtige Meinungsfreiheit, die die deutschsprachige Presselandschaft so auszeichnet.
