The last time Selenskyy said neutrality is on the table

31. Dezember 2022

was March 27th. Google it.

Quote von Michael McFaul bei 1:19:00 in in folgender Munk Debate:

Bedeutet jetzt zwangsläufig, dass der chronologischer Ablauf der Ereignisse wie folgt ausgesehen hat:

Zelenskyy und die Neutralität

Erste Erwähnung:

February 25th - einen Tag nach der russischen Invasion:

Ready to discuss neutrality, says Volodymyr Zelenskyy after suffering losses on Day 1 of Russian invasion

Das ist interessant da eine Seite in der Munk Debate die Auffassung vertreten hat, Russland habe die Neutralität der Ukraine ja bereits defakto “gehabt”.
Kann nicht ganz stimmen.

Nächste Erwähnung:

March 3rd - unmittelbar nach der zweiten Gesprächsrunde (russische Quelle):

Russia and Ukraine held a second round of talks on Thursday aimed at stopping the escalating war. Russian President Vladimir Putin has warned Ukraine that it must quickly accept the Kremlin’s demand for its “demilitarisation” and declare itself neutral – but will a neutral status of Ukraine help to stop the war?, asks political journalist Dmitry Skorobutov.

src: click
Selenskyy hat die Neutralität als Bedingung noch nicht akzeptiert.

Die Neutralität der Ukraine ist zu dem Zeitpunkt die Hauptbedingung Russlands.

The principal demand of Putin – a total neutrality of Ukraine: no membership in NATO, no weapon, foreign military bases – nothing which could threaten directly or indirectly Russian security, stability, and sovereignty.

Kontext: March 8th

FP:

Zelensky appears to float suggestions of a compromise, but U.S. officials fear Putin could double down.

src: click

March 12th

U.S. rushing $200 million in weapons for Ukraine’s defense

March 16th

Selenskyy Speech in front of the US congress

then

Biden announces $800 million in military aid for Ukraine

March 16th

FT:

Ukraine and Russia explore neutrality plan in peace talks

Fifteen-point draft deal would involve Kyiv renouncing Nato ambitions in return for security guarantees

src: click

March 20th

“US and NATO officials struggle to decipher the status of peace negotiations between Russia and Ukraine”

March 20th

Andriy Zagorodnyuk, Mitglied des Atlantic Councils, ehemaliger ukrainischer Verteidigungsminister - und die Person die 2019 CBC berichtet hat man wolle von den US Javelins und Stinger für den Donbas, da sie dort konfliktentscheidend sind (und wo sie seit Oktober 2021 zum Einsatz kamen), stellt bei Times Radio die Position der ukrainischen Regierung klar -

Good morning.

Good morning.

So in terms of of your assessment of how this war is progressing, it’s clear that russians are increasingly taking lives, many civilian lives but not further ground. How long do you think ukraine can resist, can repel the russian invasion?

Ukraine depends uh ukraine you know is obviously, you know, has a hugely motivated society and uh it has a very substantial force and uh particularly was with the foreign you know with allied support like particularly from the united states uh who committed the substantial funds, we can stand for long I mean that’s because obviously we don’t have any other choice, uh Putin decided that he wants uh to make sure that there is no such country as Ukraine and of course we will disagree so that’s why people are determined to stand until we win as simple as that so what is Zelenskyy’s strategy to repel russian troops, the strategy is, is quite straightforward because we have areas which russia and russians took temporarily and our strategy is to not to allow him to take any further areas and to counter attack and free our land where were the currently occupied by russian troops. This isn’t this isn’t the large territories actually uh but still significant and obviously we need to get rid of them.

src: click

March 22th

Selenskyj spricht vor der deutschen und französischen Presse

This is an important point. A compromise can be found in dialog. For me any compromise is irrelevant, because, as you know this hatred will be for every word. For every word. For every demand. For every course. For every guarantor of security. For everyone. You understand, right? Time must pass. Therefore, if they want to end the war, they must agree one seize fire, withdraw troops, then presidents meet, agree, that troops are withdrawn, and that there are certain security guarantors. Here you can find compromise. There are certain guarantors of our security. They must say tomorrow, that they are accepting Ukraine into Nato, and not being unclear anymore. Or say, we are not accepting it now. That is true. And they themselves understand, that they dont want to go with russia. So they do not accept us. The answer is very simple. We already understand everything. “We’re not accepting it” - because they are afraid of russia, thats all. And we need to calm down and say that. [Reaction was caused by the journalist initially asking the question nodding affirmatively, when Zelenskyy went into the “So they do not accept us” part.] Say - we need other security guarantees. There are Nato member states that want to be the guarantors of our security, which unfortunately cant provide us full membership in the alliance. But are ready to do everything that the alliance would have to do, if we were members of the alliance. And I think, thats a normal compromise. Its a compromise for everyone. For the west which does not know what to do with us in the Nato issue, for Ukraine which wants security guarantees, and for russia, which does not want to let nato expand further, and says it has had such agreements with Nato countries, with the west. And so, a compromise must be found in this. Because, this will be the end of the war. For Russia, this is not the end. There is this public letter. I dont know by whom, I dont remember, by the minister of foreign affairs, or by the president of russia. Stop talking to us with phrases like denazification etc. - we immediately said, that this sounds like an ultimatum - and we do not tolerate this. Because as soon as we are accused of nazism, by people, who follow in the footsteps of nazism, then we will not be able to tolerate it. Therefore public rhetoric can be anything, its the business of every state in this world - but this will not be binding rhetoric.

src: click.

March 27th

Selenskyj spricht laut Michael McFaul bei den Munk Debates das letzte Mal von einer möglichen Neutralität der Ukraine

Reuters an dem Tag: click

March 29th

Die Ukraine fordert zum ersten Mal schwere Waffen von den westlichen Verbündeten “as the Russian military [retreats from Kiev and] shifts its campaign to focus on the east and south of Ukraine”

March 31st

Das Atlantic Council definiert erstmals für die gesamte westliche Öffentlichkeit warum der vereinte Westen jetzt schwere Waffen liefern müsse: Da die Ukraine sich sonst nicht verteidigen könne.

April 1st

Erste Social Media Postings von Butcha erscheinen um 8 Uhr abends Ortszeit auf Telegram

Jetzt ist es aber laut Michael McFaul so, dass die Ukraine die Neutralität bis zum 27. März ernsthaft ins Auge gefasst hat, und laut Claudia Major den Willen das in Verhandlungen weiter zu verfolgen erst nach Butscha verloren hat.

Ich ertrage diese Lügen nicht mehr.

Diese Gesellschaft ist das Letzte.

Ich habe das damals gesehen und nicht verkraftet, und als ich nicht mehr konnte hat mich meine Psychotherapeutin aus der Betreuung getreten.

FICKT EUCH IHR SCHWEINE,

DIESE GESELLSCHAFT IST DAS LETZTE.

Der Vollständigkeit halber:

What did Zelenskyy say?
“Yesterday I returned from Bucha,” Zelenskyy said during his address. “There is not a single crime they would not commit there.”

“They killed entire families, adults and children, and they tried to burn the bodies,” Zelenskyy added.

He said, “The massacre in our city of Bucha is only one, unfortunately only one example of what the occupiers have been doing on our territory for the past 41 days.”

He urged full accountability for Russian actions on Ukraine’s territory and said Russia’s goal was to turn Ukrainians into “silent slaves.”

Zelenskyy vor dem UN Sicherheitsrat - April 5th

“Many ask themselves how many Buchas there are yet. Nobody knows it. We don’t have real knowledge on what is going on in the south of our country now or in other small towns around the country. Or in the east of the country,” Zelenskyy said on Friday during an interview with BILD, which is owned by Axel Springer, Insider’s parent company.

src: click - April 9th

Und danach gabs keine öffentliche Debatte über die Lieferung schwerer Waffen in Deutschland mehr.

edit: Komischer Zufall wieder, Michael McFaul hat laut seinem closing statement auf dem Weg zur Munk Debate Timothy Snyders “Bloodlands” gelesen… - und sich gedacht - wenn die Nato nicht ständig erweitert hätte, wo hätte das noch geendet!

Timothy Snyder ist der Erfinder des “Putins Grund für die Invasion war Neokolonialismus” Narratives, der in diesem Jahr eine Yale Professur bekommen hat, nachdem er mit diesem Argument in die Victor Pinchuk Foundation eingeladen wurde. Heute findet Snyder (ehemals IWMVienna) mehr so auf MSNBC statt: