13 Apr, 2024 13:07But even if a new leader comes in Ukraine, what is the position of one of the Western leaders? There was this article:
No point in Russia signing peace deal with Zelensky - Lukashenko
A new administration in Kiev could axe any agreement reached between the outgoing president and Moscow, Belarusian leader has warned
There's no use for Russia to sign a peace agreement with Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky as his term in office is nearly over, Belarusian President Alexander Lukashenko has suggested.
During a meeting with Lukashenko on Thursday, Russian President Vladimir Putin said that a peaceful end to the Ukraine conflict is "exactly what we're inclined to do," but stressed that Russia would not accept any imposed agreements that ignore its interests.
At a press briefing on Friday, Lukashenko noted that the Ukrainian president's term ends in May, which means that any deal reached with him would be futile because it could easily be overturned by the new administration.
"A situation may arise when Putin says: 'Guys, who should we sign an agreement with?..' The powers of the president of Ukraine have expired," Lukashenko stated, adding that it would actually be unwise to ink a deal with the Ukrainian leader.
"Today we will sign with him, let's say, some kind of agreement, tomorrow you will come to power, become president, you won't like it... You will discard this: it was signed by an illegitimate president, and I don't condone this at all, the new president will say," he told journalist Pavel Zarubin.
Lukashenko added that Ukraine's Western backers could also force a new president to abandon any peace deal reached between Moscow and Zelensky. According to Lukashenko, this is what happened with the now-defunct Minsk accords. Former Ukrainian president Pyotr Poroshenko and ex-German Chancellor Angela Merkel have both admitted that the agreements brokered with Moscow in 2014 were reached to allow Kiev re-arm its forces in the aftermath of the hostilities triggered by the Maidan coup.
It is currently unclear what will happen after Zelensky's first five-year term is over, as he has repeatedly ruled out holding a presidential election, citing martial law. Kiev's Western backers have urged Zelensky to hold the elections within the mandated time frame, but the Ukrainian president has said he would only do so if Western nations were willing to fund them.
In 2022, Zelensky signed a law which declares peace talks with Russia illegal as long as Vladimir Putin remains in power. According to a peace formula presented by Zelensky the same year, negotiations also can't be held unless Russian forces withdraw from all territories that Kiev claims as its own.
Russia has repeatedly said it was ready to engage in peace negotiations with Ukraine but considers Zelensky's demands unrealistic.
13 Apr, 2024 17:34The above last lines indicate it is the Western Elites that have a problem more than the people.
German leader sets conditions for talks with Putin
Moscow should first "abandon" its military campaign for negotiations to be possible, Olaf Scholz has said
Negotiations between Germany and Russia are possible but only after Moscow gives up on its goals in the Ukraine conflict, Chancellor Olaf Scholz said on Saturday. The German leader told the newspaper TAZ that he would only talk with President Vladimir Putin if Russia "abandoned" its campaign.
When Russia started its military operation against Kiev in February 2022, it cited the need to protect the people of Donbass, eradicate Nazi ideology in Ukraine, and prevent Ukraine from joining NATO.
On Saturday, Scholz reiterated his pledge to "support Ukraine for as long as it is necessary." When asked about when he thinks the conflict could end, the chancellor replied that "nobody can answer this question."
When further pressed on whether the West should "push harder for negotiations and compromise," the chancellor hit back by saying that "Russia must not win this war." Asked by TAZ when the last time he talked to Putin was, Scholz said it was in December 2022.
The interviewer noted that "many people, particularly in eastern Germany" would like to see an agreement with Russia and asked why Scholz had not tried talking to the Russian president since late 2022.
"Such conversations are useful when you feel like you can make a difference," Scholz replied, adding that he would do so "when the time comes." When asked to provide more details about a potential time frame for negotiations, the chancellor said that any talks could take place only after "Russia realizes that there will be no dictated peace" and "Putin understands that he has to abandon his campaign and withdraw troops."
In March, Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov told the newspaper Argumenti i Fakty that Moscow has new regions that need to be protected against encroachments by Kiev and that it cannot allow a state on its borders that has a stated aim of seizing Crimea and the new territories, he said, referring to the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics and Zaporozhye and Kherson regions.
Moscow has never stated that it planned to seize all of Ukraine but has explained that it sought to ensure that the Ukrainian military could not pose a threat to Russian citizens or territory. Russian officials have also repeatedly expressed a willingness to engage in peace talks at any time as long as the reality on the ground was taken into account.
Kiev has repeatedly insisted that it would only consider any peace talks with Moscow after Russia withdraws its troops from all territories that Ukraine claims as its own. The Kremlin has brushed those demands off as absurd.
On Saturday, Scholz also said that many Germans were afraid of a potential escalation and called such fears "understandable." But Berlin still would not abandon its support for Kiev, he said, adding that Germany "cannot accept" Russia prevailing on the battlefield.
"Damage was also inflicted on centers training drone operators and sites where Ukrainian troops, nationalist formations and foreign mercenaries were stationed," the ministry reported.
"The response won't be what was planned any longer; diplomatic sensitivities won out. There will be a response, but it seems it will be different from what was planned."The report noted the comments likely pointed to a weaker response than what had been approved. Kan also quoted unnamed Western diplomats saying that "the understanding is that Israel will respond."
"We remind you once again that non-compliance with mandatory Security Council resolutions must lead to sanctions against violators. We believe that the Council should consider this issue without delay."French Foreign Minister Stephane Sejourne also called for sanctions on Israel earlier this month. In February, Paris sanctioned 28 Israeli nationals, though the French government has not published their names.
The Hamas ceasefire resolution was adopted by the Security Council on March 25 in a vote of 14 in favor to none against, with the US abstaining. The document demanded a ceasefire in Gaza during Ramadan, the immediate and unconditional release of all hostages, and for humanitarian access to Gaza to be ensured.
Reports of an Israeli retaliatory strike on Iran appear to be related to a very limited attack in the vicinity of the Iranian city of Isfahan on military targets not related to Iran's nuclear program. The weapons used in this strike are unknown at this point, although Iran claims to have shot down at least three drones of an undetermined type. Israel has not taken public credit for the attack. Indeed, the only link to Israel comes from anonymous statements from sources claimed to be US officials. While Iran has stated it would strike Israel with immediate and decisive force if Israel were to attack, the extremely limited and anonymous nature of this attack may provide Iran with the opportunity to dismiss this attack as nothing of consequence, thereby eliminating the necessity of an Iranian retaliation. The Iranian Foreign Minister had issued a statement about decisive retaliation at the UN which constitutes official declaratory policy on Iranian deterrence policy which may be deemed sufficient for the moment. If the action in Isfahan is the limit of the Israeli action, then this matter may be concluded.At least one of the missiles allegedly landed in Iraq:
BREAKING: NO STRIKES FROM OUTSIDE OF IRAN "There are no foreign airstrikes against Iran and what is being circulated are lies and a misinformation war of confusion. The complicit and suspicious American media is conducting a proxy misinformation war on behalf of the "israeli" occupation."
Comment: Footage and commentary: