One degree of separation to: Robert Bosch Stiftung:
Die internationale Förderung der Robert Bosch Stiftung entwickelte sich unter dem Eindruck der beiden Weltkriege und hatte zunächst zum Ziel, zur Aussöhnung Deutschlands mit seinen Nachbarn beizutragen. Daher stand in den ersten Jahren die Verbesserung der deutsch-französischen und deutsch-polnischen Beziehungen im Fokus.[6] So förderte die Stiftung über viele Jahre den Austausch von Schülern, Lehrern und Wissenschaftlern aus Deutschland und Polen. Von 1982 bis 2000 gab sie gemeinsam mit dem Deutschen Polen-Institut (DPI) die 50-bändige Polnische Bibliothek heraus.[25] Ebenfalls gemeinsam mit dem DPI vergab sie von 2003 bis 2019 den Karl-Dedecius-Preis.[26] Ab den 1980er Jahren engagierte sich die Stiftung für die Stärkung der transatlantischen Beziehungen. So ermöglichte sie seit 1984 mit dem Robert Bosch Foundation Fellowship Program rund 600 amerikanischen Nachwuchsführungskräften einen Arbeitsaufenthalt in Deutschland.[27] Nach Ende des Kalten Krieges rückten auch die Länder Mittel- und Osteuropas, später Länder der Östlichen Partnerschaft in den Blick: Die Stiftung ist unter anderem Gesellschafterin und Mitgründerin der 2006 ins Leben gerufenen Stiftung Deutsch-Russischer Jugendaustausch.[28] Ab der Jahrtausendwende weitete die Stiftung ihre Tätigkeit auf Asien und Afrika aus. Bilaterale Formate wurden schrittweise durch multilaterale und thematisch fokussierte Programme ersetzt. Ab 2010 förderte die Stiftung zudem Projekte aus dem Bereich Frieden. 2014 gründete sie die Robert Bosch Academy in Berlin, an der Experten aus aller Welt zu globalen gesellschaftlichen Herausforderungen arbeiten.[29]
Moderator: “Then there’s going to be next week in Switzerland this what’s called a peace summit. Russia’s not invited. China’s not attending. Is it, what how would you label it?”
Anastasiya Shapochkina (Lecturer in geopolitics at Science Po and President of Eastern Circles): “First of all, this thing that’s - I think the peace summit is designed by the - as far as I understand - by the Ukrainian diplomatic establishment as a, as as a way to regroup as many nations as possible behind the peace plan of President Selenskyj and it’s a way to also test the diplomatic effort of the last two and a half years, to see if Ukraine can actually gather as a sign of support, international support, not just western partners but also as many as possible partners from the global south and thus showing and making people show --”
Moderator: “As we’re speaking the Ukrainian president has taken a quick trip away from Europe to Saudi Arabia, he’s met with the Crown Prince there.”
Anastasiya Shapochkina: “Not very logical, but exactly see, like in terms of geography - very logical in terms of the peace process, exactly - because of course Saudi Arabia as a crucial Regional actor anti-iran actor, while Iran being aligned with Russia, Saudi Arabia is traditionally aligned either with the US or against against Iran, at least more recently, and this is a crucial player who can influence other countries in the region, because what Ukraine is aiming at at the peace Summit is not just quality but also quantityand aiming to kind of make it as an alternative to the UN General Assembly Gatherings and votings where Russia is very heavily present and influencing as an alternative kind of gathering - to show how, much support it can actually garner and this is going to be a real test, I think - to Ukrainian diplomacy, really just to show for it -- however of course whether about peace we’re going to see any breakthroughs, I do not expect to see any actual breakthroughs about peace. It’s not about peace negotiations it’s about the support for Ukraine, diplomatic support and then behind diplomatic support, countries like Saudi Arabia of course can play a much greater role about which I expect them to be more circumspect.”
Moderator: “Elizabeth Braw, uh Selenskyj very badly wanted Joe Biden to attend, it’s not going to happen - instead he’s going to send his vice president Kamila Harris - why, why does he, why has Ukraine’s president invested so much political capital in this uh summit next week in Switzerland?”
Elizabeth Braw: “Well as as was just said it’s it’s an effort to show that the countries supporting Ukraine in this war are not just Western countries and and uh from my own experience for example -- when I when I talk to Indian audiences I always hear, well you know the West shouldn’t tell us what position to tell about, to to take on Ukraine and we decide for ourselves -- so it’s important for for Selenskyj to be able to show that support for Ukraine is not just a western thing, it’s not just a western dictated thing - and that really matters beyond diplomatic gestures, because a number of non-western countries uh have essentially remained on the sidelines and while being on the sidelines, have also uh directly or indirectly been supporting uh the Russian economy, by continuing to to trade with Russia -- because they haven’t imposed sanctions they essentially uh not only continue to trade with Russia but undermine Western sanctions and and they would say well it’s up to us whom we trade with but that uh essentially, well it strength- strengthens Russia weakens Ukraine even as their diplomatic posture is that they are neutral, so that as many of these countries as Selinskyj can, can convince to publicly side with Ukraine in some fashion uh - the better it is for for for for Ukraine in this war regardless of the outcome of of any talks at at this peace summit or anywhere else.”
Moderator: “Gulliver Gragg, Selenskyj -- how’s it being felt where you are, the the fact that he’s he’s gone off on you know for all these for all these summitry uh the uh..
Gulliver Gragg: “There have been some opposition voices criticizing him for being away from the country for such a long time, he was in Singapore the Philippines and he came back for one day, then he went to Sweden then of course France, Germany now these but these are all really very important meetings, and I think that you know there’s a broad understanding um of what the idea of this so-called peace summit um in Switzerland is, and I think even Ukrainians who are critical of Selenskyj and his team on a number of issues, aren’t really um suggesting that this isn’t fundamentally a good idea - because, clearly - the idea of breaking the Russian Narrative of Russia and the rest versus uh the west - by showing that Ukraine’s got a lot of countries from the rest of the world on its side as well - is, is not a bad idea in itself, but um the way things are going with the preparations of it um it doesn’t look that good - I mean earlier ukrainians were saying that if they had a hundred countries taking part they’d call it a success, and they were expecting at least Joe Biden to be there, they were expecting the Chinese to be represented albeit at a lower level -- the chinese aren’t coming they’re, putting forward a different proposal, Joe Biden’s not coming and it looks like falling well short of the um target of 100 countries so um - you know, we’ll see what happen happens in Switzerland um -- we’ll see whether or not there is a final declaration at the uh at the end of this summit, I mean I think that if there is - the ukrainians will feel that they’ve got something to work with going forward - if there isn’t, then some people in Ukraine may be saying that the Selenskyj team managed it badly, and um flopped it.”
Moderator “Selenskyj has had the Midas touch since uh, at least on the world stage uh since February uh of 2022, but from what we’ve just talked about so far in this discussion - Shina, this cabinet shake up ahead of a big conference, where you’re trying to convince people that you’re a good country to invest in. The fact that they’re not going to get as many participants in this peace summit next week as they would have liked -- is Selenskyj losing the magic the the midas touch?”
Elizabeth Braw: “Yeah, I think that there is there kind of different um ways of seeing it right, we see this as this is what’s on the surface so to say this is the what’s, what’s going on now on the other hand when you fix a big target and you announce it -- that’s that looks very good, but also it’s a target for yourself, it means that even if you fall short of it - it may still be good for you, because it depends who are the people who are actually going to show up, who wouldn’t have shown up in the general assembly of the UN -- if the big regional players heavy weights like Saudi Arabia are brought on board - etc, etc. I don’t know if there was a realistic expectation that Biden is going to actually again come to Europe - In such a short time even given his physical condition honestly -- ”
Gulliver Gragg: “He has to be at the G7 right?
Aint it --”
Moderator “Yeah, let’s talk about that. Before Bürgenstock in Switzerland, there’s a G7 Summit in Italy uh he’s he’s already boarded the Air Force One and he’s coming back to Europe!”
Elizabeth Braw: “*interrupting* -- that didn’t work, that didn’t work at all, then then then they blew it - but but just to say that for me even if they fall short of the expectation already that we have to see how many people do they manage to g - to garner and whether whether it’s going to be a successful exercise -- in general the exercise is a communication exercise. Nobody expects any result from the summit, in sense of peace decisions, some -- the decisions about the progress in the war, what’s going to happen to the future, what’s going to happen to security of europe --- it is indeed a purely image-, communication exercise and in that way - maybe would maybe -- it’s a message in---including from by the US that - better concentrate your efforts, on something that can actually yield results - like for example reconstruction meetings, or the uh the reconstruction summit in Berlin - or the Washington Summit hopefully - hopefully leads also results that’s the big one also, we forgot so…”
Moderator “Elizabeth Braw, did you hear that, there’s a fourth summit - we didn’t mention it yet it’s the NATO Summit taking place uh actually it’s due to begin the day after the second round of uh french legislative elections - we’ll know then if the far right’s in power or not in this country, uh is that the big one?”
Elizabeth Braw: “Well it is the big one as as far as NATO is concerned, but it’s not going, it’s not going to to lead any breakthroughs when it comes to the Ukraine war and and since we are also discussing people who, who will not be at various Summits -- the Washington Summit will be just a few days after the UK elections, so it’s uh it’s who will participate from the UK government is is still shrouded in mystery - and we may not know until the day of of the summit [doesnt matter much all parties are pro Ukraine] this day - the summit begins who will represent the UK but um the Washington Summit really is about NATO itself and yes, there will be various uh overtures to Ukraine -- shows of support, but this is about uh decisions uh about NATO internally how to to, how the alliance should be set up - it’s it’s much less about Ukraine, but I think that the the - what has changed in these past two years is that Selenskyj has become a regular guest at various gatherings at which Ukraine would not have been invited to -- which Ukraine would not have been invited two and a half years ago, and he’s he’s invited as essentially as a star guest and a special guest uh and not as a full participant - but it’s it’s it is striking, because Ukraine is always the that additional guest that is invited and and then when it comes to to Selenskyj lo-- losing his midas touch, that was always going to happen -- it was going to be uh trendy and and uh important, right -- at the beginning of the war for everybody to to support Ukraine and they wanted to -- they felt very passionately about it, it was always the case that, that passion was going to wane after a while and it has waned by the fact that he is continuing these uh uh these constant visits to the West - is both a sign of the fact that he’s invited to the west and other countries, is both a sign of the fact that he’s still invited -- still welcome and of the fact that these countries feel that is still there is, still a viable case for supporting Ukraine - if they didn’t think that was there was anything more they could do he would not be invited.”
Summary: “Whats he doing?” “Well, Idk - it seems like hes still getting support, so let him.”
Also more Kofman, but yeah thats… normal. Expected. 😉
edit: Also - I forgot how much of diplomacy at the “top level” is nothing but an intellectual marvel… *rolleyes*
And the propaganda game already continues, because only nine hours after Andrij Jermak stated, that russia would be invited to the next peace summit, the ukrainian ambassador to Estonia is already backtracking on that statement. I in the video above at around 16:30 min in - he states, that russia could maybe be invited to the next ukrainian peace (formuala) summit, but only if russia would “agree on the framework of this negotiation process”, which still contains - “russia leaves Ukraine entirely”, “russia pays reparations, “people resonsible for warcrimes get punished by international law tribunals” - because the framework still is the 10 point peace formula.
This is so fucking stupid and hideous.
Before we can sit together to talk about peace, you have to accept defeat.
Of course, if you screen the Carnegie Endowment video up top -- the message of the actual people responsible for signaling ukrainian action to public institutions in the western world, are delivering you prolonged war scenarios.
Also - according to Masym Kononenko above, the Ukrainian peace summit also has a new tagline, which is “If you want peace, you have to prepare for war.” It is true! (Always liked that phrasing of ukrainian officials. I did.)
So - as always:
Propaganda hat natürlich wieder niemand entdeckt.
… to educate your paying students. (Well, its their parents that are paying, so…)
First: Vasyl Khymynets (Ambassador of Ukraine to the Republic of Austria)
At 14 min in:
“We dont decline a political process. And this political process envisages envolvement of the entire world. So far, it deals not only with the war in Ukraine, it deals with the challenge for global security architecture. This architecture is to be based on principles and rules. We dont invent nothing new! [with the 10 point Selenskyj peace formula]”
*cough**cough**cough**coughingfit*
From a time when the peace formula still contained 5 points (Selenskyj specifies them in the General Debate of the 77th session of the UN General Assembly), which were then expanded to ten so that three less problematic ones can now be negotiated in Bürgenstock in order to - as NHK Japan states so beautifully - “Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy expects the peace summit to be a framework that will give his country an upper hand in ending the war.” - so from that time, the first five points of Selenskyj’s peace formula, recited by Selenskyj himself in the form of a pure hate tirade (and yes, I’m far from joking - ):
(For your understanding, these points still remain part of Selensky’s peace formula as of today. Its just that no one wants to touch them:
It [the first draft of the joint statement for the end of the Bürgenstock summit] falls short of mentioning the withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukraine and the restoration of Ukraine’s territorial integrity [both being integral points in Selenskyjs 10 point peace formula].
[…]
Diplomatic sources say that the withdrawal of Russian troops ANDOTHERTHINGSTHATUKRAINEHAVEBEENCALLINGFOR were dropped from the draft because it took into consideration some emerging nations in Asia and Middle East that maintain ties with Russia.
Vasyl Khymynets (Ambassador of Ukraine to the Republic of Austria) bei 19 min in:
“Last but not least, why was russia not invited? The answer is obvious, because it is an aggressor, internationally recognized. Because russia is boycotting and thwarting all constructive endeavours. We can witness it in the UN and other international organizations. [Yeah, maybe also look at the US in the security council, once in a while - just maybe… US honorable guest of se peace formula summit of course.]. A global summit doesnt need boycotting an quirrels. A summit needs constructive discussion for global peace and security in the future. Dear Friends, I can assure you, the summit will take place definitely. As of today there are more than 100 countries [80 actually (as of the 10th of june 2024) - see press conference that I’m refering to below] willing to participate and it will bring tangible outcomes.”
Where to begin.… Do we have a Ukrainian NGO official that refutes both of this points in a two minute statement, in an interview with France 24? Well yes we do…
France 24, May 13th 2024:
39:33 in this Video:
Moderator: A month from now the Posh Swiss Resort of Bergenstock is due to host a peace conference for Ukraine 160 Nations uh invited uh what’s going to be the idea, Hanna Shelest?
Hanna Shelest: Of that uh of that at a time when uh we talked earlier in our conversation about the challenges Ukraine faces in this War uh what what are you expecting from uh from this conference next month this conference is not about the peace in Ukraine it is much bigger because it is about the peace formula where 10 points are everything from the uh territorial Integrity to the Justice to food security and nuclear security those questions that the Russian aggression against Ukraine raised and demonstrated that the current un system is definitely failed in many questions that’s why Ukraine managed to gather so many Nations for the previous like in Malta there were more than 80 countries presented because they’re trying to set a certain maybe not new rules but at least to understand what to do when the nuclear uh Power for example is threatening non-nuclear power
Moderator: So wait, this is not at all going to be about figuring out a way to end fighting?
Hanna Shelest: No, this is first of all about setting the position of the Civilized world against Russia, so if we would return back to the second world War that’s something like a tech run conference, where the Nations started to think how they will live after the war - what should be done, yes there are some questions that are responding to the timely… like for example return of kidnapped kids there are more than 20,000 of them kidnapped by Russia but still uh a lot of of the questions discussed that is about how the world and Europe should look after the hostilities are over what are you expecting.
Dr. Hanna Shelest is the Security Studies Program Director Editor-in-Chief of UA: Ukraine Analytica and Head of the Board of the NGO “Promotion of Intercultural Cooperation”. *cough**cough*
But that might be a little thin… Do we have more people refuting these points? Well yes of course we do…
France 24 again different Panel from 29th of May, 2024 at 34:40 min. in:
France 24’s Gulliver Cragg [British Journalist, Correspondent for France 24 in Kyiv, Ukraine, also covering Poland, Belarus & Hungary.] am 29. Mai 2024:
Gulliver Cragg: [It’s absolutely not clear that Joe Biden will attend that summit I think the latest signals from the United States were more um along the lines of representation at a lower level than the president -- a lot of heads of state though in Europe in particular, heads of government, have said that they will attend.] Let’s be clear, it’s not really a peace Summit the ukrainians are calling it a peace summit - and they’ve got an argument for calling it that because, basically they think there will never be real peace unless we get the Russians to withdraw from our territory and they want to get as many countries as possible on board with more or less that line. I think that there will be negotiations at this summit and the final communique might be something rather different, but it’s about uh Ukraine showing how many countries in the world support its summit and that’s why it’s crucially important - really for its most important ally the United States to be represented at a high level but unfortunately I’m not sure that it looks like happening.
And a little later, same source:
Gulliver Cragg: With Ukraine uh I mean it doesn’t look like in in a way on the surface of things it doesn’t look like a great idea for Ukraine to hold this summit and call it a peace summit and then you know - be disappointed by not having as as many people attended as they kind of - build it as, but …
Moderator: That said, Gulliver, if I may Gulliver, Vlodimir Zelsenskyy is going to have a chance to make his pitch in person next week, he’s been invited to commemorations of D-Day that Joe Biden will be attending -
Gulliver Cragg: Yes and by the way there are a lot of rumors in Ukraine at the moment that um something will be announced about um French Ukrainian uh cooperation meeting in Normandy [Französisch Ukrainisches Sicherheitsabkommen incoming!], but just going back to the summit in Switzerland - some people are still arguing that it’s actually a pretty clever um you know trick [!!!] on the behalf of the Ukrainian diplomacy [!] to basically have a peace plan that’s currently being labeled the Zelinskyy formula which he actually outlined in late 2022 - you know, which is basically “peace can only be achieved if the Russians pull all their forces out of Ukraine” for that sort of plan that Ukraine’s allies have signed up to being no longer the Zelinskyy formula - but a formula that has as many countries as possible have signed up to and it’s a way of sort of shoring up their alliances and making their case which is - you know despite everything uh that uh that George [?] has been saying you know, is is that it’s hard to imagine any kind of peace - if Ukraine doesn’t win this war, despite the fact that it looks so hard for that to be achieved at the current state of things.
Also, on why Russia wasnt invited, Andrii Yermak (Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine) at the Victor Pinchuk Foundation financed Yes Conference on the 10th of September 2023, at 14 min. in:
Fareed Zakaria: “At what point does someone have to engage with the russians in this process? You said Saudi Arabia [previous host of President Selenskyj glorious peace summit (third or forth, before the one in Bürgenstock was reframed as “the first one” of course - more on that later…)] was helpful in the prisoner exchange, because they have good relations with russia. Do you need other such intermediaries to act to s- Because at some point the russians have to be involved to produce a seize fire, to produce some of those goals [refers to goals in Selenskyjs by then 10 point peace formula]”
Andrii Yermak: “No, Fareed, I dont believe in mediation. Its enough mediation in our past history. It’s not work. In what I believe. I believe first of all, and now I position strong an very clear that - we’re not just thinking about any negotiations, till the last Russian soldiers in our land. But the peaceful formula! It’s built in such a way, it’s 10 points - and the last points is a theoretical confirmation of the end of the war - but before it’s necessary to make uh the -- this very hard job, by each nine points which you can see and listen and of course in the last - the second peaceful summit after [the genius that is Andrii Yermak trying to say “second to last” - what a genius] when we can be able to realize everything which described in nine points [before] -- yes of course [then] it will be some possibility to meet [Russia] and to meet not just between Russia and Ukraine [but] to meet this all countries who will be participate who will be the guardians on this way -- who will be guarantors that we are juridically fixed, that this war it’s ended Ukraine [gets] back all our territory. Ukraine received all the compensation for all these damages and all these people who is made these crimes who will received full responsibility!”
Fareed Zakaria: “Uhm. [*falling off the chair*]”
[Applause]
And on the viability of the four points Andrii Yermak (Head of the Office of the President of Ukraine) mentions last - please refer back to:
So far the Diplomatische Akademie Wien, only featured one liar -- can we make this two within the same panel?
Well of course we can!
Must be tough to book so many liars - does the Österreichisch Amerikanische Gesellschaft help with the booking?
Enter: Guna Japina (Ambassador of Latvia to the Republic of Austria)
at 01:06:00 in:
Guna Japina: “Yeah… About negotiations with russia, sorry, but what would you like to negotiate about [Peace(summit)?] with russia right now, at this particular stage. Yes. Yes. And maybe may I rephrase your question in my understanding: “Why is russia not there in Bürgenstock?” Because russia did not want to be in Bürgenstock. Yeah! And this is actually a very clear position. What is the attitude of the aggressor in this particular stage [not the second to last Selenskyj Peace Formula summit - not quite yet, …]?”
Well… Who should proper Journalists ask about this, if not the (completely lying) Ambassador of Latvia, that the Diplomatische Akademie Wien just had to invite, onto the same panel as the Ukranian Ambassador to Austria that was lying to the attendees in the Österreichishe Diplomatische Akademie before?
Well… Certainly not to the Ukrainian Ambassador to Germany, when speaking to the ZDF on April the 18th…
Deutscher Botschafter der Ukraine Oleksij Makejew am 18. April 2024 bei ZDF heute Live, bei 35:30 in:
„Botschafter der Ukraine in Deutschland, Oleksij Makejew: “Wir haben es klar gemacht dass diese, diese erste Runde nicht zusammen mit Russland geführt wird damit wir auch eine starke Unterstützung von Partner bekommen. Eigentlich um diesen Krieg zu beenden braucht man nur das russische Wort und das Handeln. Russland kann diesen Krieg stoppen in dem Russland ihre Kräfte von den besitzten Gebieten zurückzieht und hört auf uns täglich zu beschießen, aber leider kommt dieses das Recht der Ukraine auf Existenz wird von von russischer Führung und russische Bevölkerung überhaupt nicht anerkannt. Russland will uns als Nation vernichten und da können wir nur können wir uns nur wehren.“
Because, as we know by now - ambassadors lie. All the time.
So whom to ask… Hm.…
Enter:
VBSDDPS Pressekonferenz zum Frieden in der Ukraine: Stand der Vorbereitungen und Sicherheitsvorkehrungen (10th of June 2024)
At 34:40 min in:
PK Sprecher: “Herr Binner”
David Binner: “Ja, David Binner, NZZ. Präsident Selenskjy hat eine Beteiligung Russlands von Beginn an eigentlich implizit ausgeschlossen. Nachdem er hier war, hat er ja gesagt, dass er nur Länder dabei haben möchte, die die Souveränität der Ukraine auch respektieren. Meine Frage wäre -- haben sie das, also den Einbezug Russlands auch über die mittlere Frist, haben sie das mit ihm besprochen, als er - als er hier war - und wenn ja, was war da der Plan?
Ignazio Cassis: “Ja, danke. Der erste Regierungsvertreter mit dem ich nach dem Besuch Präsident Selenskyj in Bern gesprochen habe, war der Außenminister Russland Sergei Lavrov am 19 Januar in New York - und das war bewusst so gewollt von mir. Und ich habe darüber natürlich Präsident Selenskjy eine Woche vorher hier in Bern informiert - und ich habe ihm auch ganz klar gesagt, dass ein Friedensprozess nur unter Beteiligung der involvierten Parteien geht. Das sieht er auch. Grundsätzlich ist die Position die ich in jenen Moment und das muss man gut betonen bekommen habe war - es wird ein inklusiver Prozess, aber nicht zur Stunde Null [ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE - sorry the record got stuck, five times already…] wir müssen es starten [as the fifth country holding a Selensky peace formula summit?] und dann schauen wir auf den Weg vielleicht bei einer zweite Konferenz in einem andere Land, das möglich sei. Ich sage das in jenen Moment, weil auch diese Positionierung schwankt, über die Zeit, äh von allen Seiten. [FRIEDENSKONFERENZ!] Deshalb ist die Nichtteinladung Russland [!] eine Kombination von zwei Elementen. Auf die eine Seite die Kündigung, die klare Stellungnahme Russland, bevor überhaupt die Einladungen ausgesandt worden [January 19th!] wir werden nicht teilnehmen, wir sind nicht interessiert - wir wollen nicht eingeladen werden [more on that later, there was a reason given…] und auf die andere Seite die Positionierung Ukraine wir sind nicht bereit zur Stunde Null Russland am Bord zu haben. [Fifth such Peace Formula Conference… *cough**cough*] ähm, in diesem Spannungsfeld fand unseres Reaching Out Aktion und wir haben selbstverständlich nicht alleine und eigenständig versucht Einfluss zu haben, auf die zwei Parteien, sondern durch die Mithilfe und Unterstützung wichtiger und mächtiger Ländern der Welt - und trotzdem ist für die Stunde Null die Rechnung nicht aufgegangen. Noch nicht. Wir haben gesagt wir kämpfen bis am Vorabend der Konferenz, aber heute ist - sieht es so aus, dass, dass es so sein wird.”
Stefan Lanz: “Vielleicht wurde ein Teil meiner Frage schon in Französisch oder Italienisch beantwortet darum vielleicht noch mal für dummies, hätte nicht die Schweiz einfach Russland einladen müssen, damit dann Russland in der Verantwortung gewesen wäre abzulehnen und nicht zu kommen. Wäre das diplomatisch nicht geschickter gewesen, vielleicht?
Ignazio Cassis: “Ja danke für die Frage, tatsächlich, die die die die [thats a fourcount of “die”] Gemüter natürlich bewegt und ich verstehe es auch. Es hat auch unsere bewegt für für für [thats a three count on “für”] wochenlang bis wir einen Entscheid getroffen haben. Ja das wäre eine Möglichkeit natürlich - nur das Problem ist, dass die Ablehnung Russland bereits im Vorfeld bereits die bevor die Einladungen ausgesandt wurden und das mangelne Interesse das der Außenminister Lavrov mir selber sagte, in Januar, in dem er er meinte, es sei ohnehin eine pro-ukrainische Veranstaltung und nicht einen äh genuinen Versuch einen Friedensprozess aufzugleisen [NEIN! Dazu vielleicht noch Kurz der Standard vom 10.06.20024: “Es ist zwar das erste derartig hochrangige internationale Treffen zum Thema Frieden in der Ukraine, aber es geht nicht um Friedensverhandlungen.”] das hätten wir dann natürlich eine Ablehnung Russland erwarten können [SOTHEYDINDTASK. Ah. Aha. Oh. Uh. Eh.. Aaah.] Oder? [Got to love the swiss “Oder?!”] Das Problem ist, wäre keine Ablehnung gekommen, sondern eine Annahme, das wäre inkompatibel gewesen mit mit der Ukraine - mit der Position der Ukraine in dem Moment [ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, sorry the record got stuck…] und aus aus diesem Dilemma konnten wir nicht rausnehmen [sic! rauskommen]. Wir haben natürlich andere Wege, das ist die erste äh vol die erste Vollzug den man sich vorstellen kann [not the first Peace Formula summit, but the fifth, nice save!] aber die Diplomatie ist kreativ und man hat viele andere Wege gesucht, aber leider bis jetzt ist es uns nicht gelungen die Tür etwas [auf] zu machen, so dass es beide Seiten es ertragen können.”
PK Sprecher: “Frau Rin.”
Frau Rin: “Die Schweiz hatte ja von Anfang an eben gesagt eigentlich sei es das Ziel Russland an Bord zu holen. Jetzt wenn ich sie richtig verstehe hat die Ukraine so ein bisschen gedroht sich zurückzuziehen, wenn Russland dabei wäre - wäre das nicht ein Punkt gewesen den man vor der Annahme dieser Organisation mit der Ukraine hätte klären müssen, dass sie sich eben bereit erklärt auch zu kommen, wenn Russland dabei ist?”
Ignazio Cassis: “Nein, nein - wir haben das gleiche zu Beginn gesagt wie jetzt. Das Ziel ist Russland am Bord zu holen. Wir haben für den Friedensprozess gesagt - die Konferenz ist der Startpunkt eines Friedensprozess [aber keine Friedenskonferenz]. Russland muss im Friedensprozess an Bord sein, ob sie das war unser Wunsch, idealerweise auch am Start - an der Eröffnung dieses Friedensprozess [SHITFUCK, its not the first, its the fifth peace formula summit without russia -- but the Ukraine reframed that as well] wir wünschen uns, wir haben das Ziel in Bürgenstock einen Friedensprozess zu eröffnen.
Das wird dann Wochen Monate dauern ob überhaupt Erfolg sein wird - wird die Zukunft zeigen, aber es ist klar, dass in diesem Prozess Russland am Bord sein muss. Darüber sind alle einverstanden, die Frage ist ab welchem Zeitpunkt ab welch Moment darf sie dabei sein. [See Andreii Yermak, second to last peace formula summit, when all countries agree russia has to move out of Ukraine, pay reparations, honor the territorial integrity of Ukraine… Bürgenstock only was the fifth such summit without russia, I mean --- ] äh und hier divergieren die Meinungen.”
French Journalist before that: Ah… Look that one up yourself…
Hard to be the Diplomatische Akademie Wien. All you ever get to educate your Students seem to be complete and utter liars…
Oh, and your Moderator proved VERYPARTICULAR at picking Slido questions to ask the lying ambassadors - he just wouldnt and wouldnt pick the two most upvoted… I wonder why… Ah - look it up yourselves.…
Grüße an die Österreichisch Amerikanische Gesellschaft bitte.
PS: Of course Switzerland (Bern) also was very successful in handing over great, astonishing Selenskyj peace formula summit to the sixth potential host for such a summit:
Cassis bestätigt, dass Verhandlungen über eine mögliche Nachfolgekonferenz in vollem Gang seien. Details wollte Cassis keine verraten. Nur so viel, dass der in der Schweiz angestossene Friedensprozess «ausserhalb der westlichen Welt» fortgeführt werden solle, in einem Land des sogenannten globalen Südens oder aber in der arabischen Welt.
«Gemeinsame Interessen»
Cassis hatte am vergangenen Donnerstag mit dem saudischen Aussenminister, Prinz Faisal bin Farhan, telefoniert und dabei über «gemeinsame Interessen» gesprochen, wie das saudische Aussenministerium auf X verlauten liess. Der FDP-Aussenpolitiker Hans-Peter Portmann sagt, dass er jüngst sehr gute Signale erhalten habe. Der Zürcher Nationalrat hat erst vor kurzem eine parlamentarische Freundschaftsgruppe Schweiz - Saudiarabien ins Leben gerufen. Vertreter des Schura-Rats, eines beratenden Gremiums des saudischen Königs, haben während der Sommersession das Bundeshaus besucht.
Ob die Schweiz bei allfälligen Friedensverhandlungen in Riad noch eine Rolle spielt, ist derzeit ebenfalls Teil von Gesprächen. Könnte sie beratend mithelfen, einen Neutralitätsstatus für die Ukraine zu entwerfen? Die Antworten auf solche und ähnliche Fragen scheinen derzeit noch in weiter Ferne zu liegen. Die saudische Botschaft in Bern lässt entsprechende Anfragen seit Tagen unbeantwortet. Kommt dazu: Aus Sicht Russlands hat die Eidgenossenschaft ihre Glaubwürdigkeit als neutraler Staat ohnehin verloren, nachdem die Schweiz sich den EU-Sanktionen angeschlossen hatte.
Die zuständigen Bundesräte Amherd und Cassis hoffen nun, dass am Wochenende auf dem Bürgenstock der Fahrplan für den weiteren Verlauf der Friedensbemühungen festgelegt werden kann. Die Schlusserklärung dazu ist derzeit ebenfalls in der Vernehmlassung. Ziel sei es, diese am Sonntag einstimmig zu verabschieden. Der Miteinbezug Russlands war von Beginn an umstritten.
Diese Gesellschaft ist das absolut grotesk und abartigst Allerletzte.
edit:
Oh for fucks sake…
08.34 Uhr: Kiew hofft auf Teilnahme Russlands an zweiter Ukraine-Konferenz
Kiew wünscht sich eine Teilnahme Russlands an einer zweiten Friedenskonferenz zur Ukraine. Kurz vor Beginn des ersten Gipfels in der Schweiz am Wochenende sagte der Leiter des ukrainischen Präsidialamtes, Andrij Jermak, per Videoschalte aus Berlin: “Wir suchen nach der Möglichkeit, auf dem zweiten Gipfel einen Vertreter Russlands einzuladen und diesen gemeinsamen Plan gemeinsam vorzustellen”, so Jermak.
Die Friedenskonferenz in der Schweiz im Luxus-Resort Bürgenstock findet im Anschluss an ein Treffen der Staats- und Regierungschefs der G7-Gruppe Ende dieser Woche in Süditalien statt, bei dem auch der ukrainische Präsident Wolodymyr Selenskyj zu Gast sein wird. Selenskyj wird dann am Samstag weiter in die Schweiz reisen. Das Treffen wurde auf Bitte der Ukraine hin organisiert. Kiew erhofft sich davon breite internationale Unterstützung für seine Bedingungen für ein Ende des Krieges gegen Russland. Moskau hatte im Vorfeld kundgetan, nicht an einer Teilnahme interessiert zu sein und wurde entsprechend nicht eingeladen.
Hurra. Diese Auslegung ist falsch und tendenziös.
Mit Russland habe man am 19. Jänner gesprochen, jetzt haben wir den 12 Juni. Russland hat am 19. Jänner “kundgetan nicht an einer Teilnahme interessiert zu sein, da es sich um eine Unterstützungsveranstaltung der Ukraine handeln würde”.
Die Schweiz hat darauf hin “auf diplomatischem Weg” immer wieder eine Einladung Russlands “versucht” - da die Schweiz zuvor verlautbart hat, man würde auch Russland laden wollen -- eine Einladung ist dann aber nicht erfolgt - und als Grund wurde von Cassis angegeben, dass:
Das Problem ist, wäre keine Ablehnung gekommen, sondern eine Annahme, das wäre inkompatibel gewesen mit mit der Ukraine - mit der Position der Ukraine in dem Moment [ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, ATTHATSTAGE, sorry the record got stuck…] und aus aus diesem Dilemma konnten wir nicht rausnehmen [sic! rauskommen].
Dieses “Dilemma” hat heute - um 8 Uhr Früh, Andrij Jermak aufgelöst, allerdings LEIDER erst für die nächste Friedensformelkonferenz. Was will man machen…
Immerhin, “am nächsten Gipfel” soll Russland dann auch geladen werden dürfen, das ist tatsächlich was Neues. Der Plattenhänger ist damit behoben.
Jetzt hoff ich ja ganz stark, ich bin - voll dieser Hoffnung - nicht von Propaganda beeinflußt…
Der BR Redakteur kann leider nicht sinnerfassend lesen, respektive PKs konsumieren, was will man machen…
edit: Also - I forgot how much of diplomacy at the “top level” is nothing but an intellectual marvel… *rolleyes*
And the propaganda game already continues, because only nine hours after Andrij Jermak stated, that russia would be invited to the next peace summit, the ukrainian ambassador to Estonia is already backtracking on that statement. I in the video above at around 16:30 min in - he states, that russia could maybe be invited to the next ukrainian peace (formuala) summit, but only if russia would “agree on the framework of this negotiation process”, which still contains - “russia leaves Ukraine entirely”, “russia pays reparations, “people resonsible for warcrimes get punished by international law tribunals” - because the framework still is the 10 point peace formula.
This is so fucking stupid and hideous.
Before we can sit together to talk about peace, you have to accept defeat.
Of course, if you screen the Carnegie Endowment video linked here -- the message of the actual people responsible for signaling ukrainian action to public institutions in the western world, are delivering you prolonged war scenarios.
Also - according to Masym Kononenko above, the Ukrainian peace summit also has a new tagline, which is “If you want peace, you have to prepare for war.” It is true! (Always liked that phrasing of ukrainian officials. I did.)
So - as always:
Propaganda hat natürlich wieder niemand entdeckt.
- by any analyst - to underline Putins territorial claims/ambitions towards ukrainian territory…
Dr. Andrei Illarionov, a Senior Policy Adviser during Putin’s early period as President is frank in what strengths Putin possesses and why the West so often gets him wrong.
President Vladimir Putin chaired a meeting in Yeisk on the Russian military-diplomatic presence in the Black Sea-Azov region
September 17, 2003 18:00 Krasnodar Region
President Putin at Yeisk airport.
Mr Putin described the Azov-Black Sea basin as a zone of Russian strategic interests. The Black Sea provides Russia with direct access to key global transportation routes, including energy routes, President Putin stressed.
However, the problems of navigation and the border regime in the region have not been finally settled. In particular, complicated and painstaking work is needed together with Ukrainian experts to define the final legal status of the Sea of Azov and the Krech Strait. The President said he discussed the topic during his meeting with his Ukrainian counterpart today.
Complications also arise with setting the rules of navigation in the Black Sea straits. The Russian leader mentioned Turkey’s attempts to limit the passage of foreign ships, above all oil tankers, through the Bosphorus and the Dardanelles to the Aegean. There were objective reasons for that, he said, but there was also a wish to put pressure on rivals. The President stressed that the principles of navigation in that key area must comply with existing international legal norms and asked the Foreign Ministry to keep the development of the situation around the straits under close watch.
The President called for a thorough analysis of the real advantages of working with the Black Sea Economic Cooperation Organisation and determining the tactics and strategy of Russian participation in its work.
Military-political stability in the Black Sea region can only be ensured if there is an effective system of confidence and security measures, the Russian leader said, stressing that such a system has been put in place in the Black Sea basin with active Russian participation.
Mr Putin spoke in favour of modernising the Russian Black Sea Fleet and its base, stressing that this work must be conducted jointly with Russia’s closest partner, Ukraine.
Comprehensive development of the Russian land and sea border was a serious problem awaiting solution, the President said. He proposed holding a meeting of the Russian Security Council to discuss the issue.
Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov, Defence Minister Sergei Ivanov, Director of the Federal Security Service Nikolai Patrushev, Chief of the Russian Armed Forces General Staff Anatoly Kvashnin, Deputy Chief of Staff of the Presidential Executive Office Alexander Abramov, the Presidential Envoy to the Southern Federal District Viktor Kazantsev, the Governor of the Kranodar Region Alexander Tkachyov, First Deputy Foreign Minister Vyacheslav Trubnikov, First Deputy FSB Director and head of the Border Service Vladimir Pronichev, Air Force Commander-in-Chief Vladimir Mikhailov, Chief Naval Commander Vladimir Kuroyedov and Russia’s Ambassador to Ukraine Viktor Chernomyrdin all took part in the meeting.
Diese Webseite verwendet Cookies um die Nutzungserfahrung für seine Besucher zu verbessern. Bitte informiere dich bei Gelegenheit darüber wie sich Cookies auf deine Privatsphäre im Web auswirken.
