A negotiated peace in Ukraine

Ukraine appears to be fighting back against a superpower in a manner that few expected possible, possibly even the people of Ukraine themselves.

Yesterday, I snapped at my mother when she had talked about how a negotiated settlement to the conflict in Ukraine should take place.  Part of my annoyance is because there is to be a Stop The War meeting later this month were people are to discuss how the war should end.  Many blame NATO expansion for this war, but forget how Russia has invaded other nations before this, Russian troops continuing to occupy Transnistria (‘92), Abkhazia (‘93), South Ossetia (‘08), also the way it invaded and annexed Crimea and the conflict the Donetsk and Luhansk regions of Ukraine which resulted in Russia accidentally destroying MH17.  Those in the Baltic states are nervous of Russia and have joined NATO to prevent what happened to Moldova happening to them.   

Before this war, in the build up to it, the intention of Russia to annex both Luhansk and Donetsk was discussed in a socially distanced meeting with Putin, though he denied that this was to happen, referenda into this were planned and have now been delayed.  

The irony of course is that the Stop the War meeting would be banned in Russia, Transnistria, Abkhazia, South Ossetia and Russian occupied Ukraine.

So my question to those who want a negotiated peace, is should this involve Russia keeping the parts of Ukraine it occupied in 2014, or should more of Ukraine be given to Russia now?  

MH17 and Russian incompetence

A few years ago, after the destruction of MH17, I made a post on my blog. My first post was in 2014 and I posted an update the following year.  But one question remained to me.  How could the operators mistake a civilian airliner for a military plane?  Civilian airliners have been destroyed before, and example being Iran Air 655 when a very stupid decision made in the heat of battle, but when it came to MH17, no battle was taking place. 

 

The answer appears to be incompetence. We have seen during Putins War that too many Russian troops have been poorly equipped and badly trained.  We can only imagine if the crew and passengers would be alive if the crew had been properly trained.

Did Putin do it?

Sergei Skripal was discharged from hospital this week.  I have no idea about what state he is in or if he has had any residual effects from his poisoning.

What was interesting at the time, was that the poisoning made no sense.  Over the years, may Russians have died in mysterious, or not so mysterious circumstances.  So while some forms of arranging an accident of a spy may not be possible, others were.  And it is the use of a nerve agent that made me think that Russia was innocent.  Until this interview.


Russia has claimed innocence over many issues, this including the destruction of MH17, the accidental invasion of Crimea and the way that opponents of Putin keep dying.  All sorts of conspiracy theories have been put forwards by them.  And it is the way that the Russian Ambassador decided to cast doubt on the poisoning taking place which finally swung it for me.

However, while I do think that Russia is responsible for the poisoning, I still doubt that Putin himself was behind it.  To murder someone (or rather try to,) using a method that would be bound to antagonise the west in a manner that has caused a lot of collateral damage which will cause worldwide outrage is not something that the leader of a nation would do.

I do wish Sergei Skripal and his daughter the best. But, while I do not trust Putin, I do hope that an alternative leader who is worse does not replace him.

MH17 and why I think that Russia was responsible for it being shot down

On July the 17th, I posted an entry on my blog about MH17 and the aim of the post was to show that the rebels in Ukraine were responsible for shooting it down using a Russian surface to air missile.  I knew that any smoking guns on the internet at the time would be hard to find later.

Basically, after MH17 was blown out of the sky, posts were made that the rebels had shot it down.  Once it became apparent, that the plane that was destroyed was a commercial airliner, those posts vanished as they were deleted.  However, ITAR-TASS reported the destruction on the day of a plane and stated that the rebels in Ukraine shot it down and that this occurred on the outskirts of the town of Torez.

I have posted this on Twitter and it has led to confusion as the article also refers to a plane shot down on another day.

So I have decided to include links about the ITAR-TASS article with this post.


DONETSK, July 17. /ITAR-TASS/. Militiamen of the self-proclaimed Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) brought down a military transport Antonov-26 (An-26) plane of the Ukrainian Air Force on the outskirts of the town of Torez, eyewitnesses said. A missile hit the An-26, it fell on the ground and caught blaze, they said. On July 14, militiamen of the self-proclaimed Luhansk People’s Republic downed another An-26 of the Ukrainian Air Force.


As you can see from the links the Ukrainian air force has had planes shot down (and it has accused Russia of some of these incidents directly) but only one plane was shot down on July the 17th (this being MH17), and only one plane has been shot down near Torez (this being MH17).

So, the article which I linked to, where ITAR-TASS reports on Ukrainian rebels shooting down a plane on the 17th can only refer to MH17.  Which means that Russian news states that the Ukrainian rebels shot down MH17.

Please tell me if I am wrong about this claim or if there are flaws in my argument.  And thank you for reading this.