The Russians made the same argument about Ukraine's aggression at the beginning of the conflict. The entire world has been saying it about the USA's wars as well. This very mechanism of 'punishing ones enemies so they never do it again' has simply justified the atrocities; it has not ended a single damn thing.
If the USA had been punished in the same manner for its atrocities in Iraq and Afghanistan, would we have had the rest of the disaster unfold?
And we see the end result of this line of thought in Gaza, where literally millions of human beings lives have been irreversibly damaged for generations, because someone decided to punish their enemy at massive scales. And as we can see in the case of Gaza, this is no guarantee of peace, whatsoever. This line of thought has led to genocide and ethnic cleansing at massive scales.
And, it simply does not work. Period. There are generations of new terrorists who want vengeance in the Gaza/Israel war, just as vehemently as Americans do, for the Ukraine/Russia war. These children will only be converted back to peace-makers if their lives are _improved_ by the peace plan, not made worse, and there is a long, long road ahead in both wars, for all parties, to attain that condition.
At some point, making peace means putting aside any aggression-based arguments and just getting on with the program to bring both sides together, to stop the fighting and start the economic unity required to keep things peaceful.
This peace plan seems like an attempt to do just that, so it should be supported. After all, it does contain triggers that will re-ignite the war machine again - and, it could be argued that should those triggers be activated, the war would be more justifiable to the world community, and those who seek a wider, escalated war against Russia, will get their fulfilment if this plan is betrayed. This peace plan would be the first step towards greater forms of punishment - but it works for both sides. If Putin violates the agreement - Russia comes under attack by the entire world. If Ukraine's leadership violates the agreement, Russia gets cart blanche to continue its dismantling of the Ukrainian state. Therefore, the peace-makers must have the reins in lieu of the warmongers, as of now.
(Disclaimer: I've read the peace plan, have Ukrainian and Russian friends in my circles who are veterans from the conflict, and their opinion is: yes, it is far past the point where the aggressive warrior narcissists need to be ignored and statesmen and diplomats need to work harder to re-establish peace between the two nations. I personally feel that this plan has to proceed, or else the entire world is going to see the conflict expand to our own borders. This means the hyper-actualisation of warrior narcissism needs to stop, and civilisation-building economic tools need to be better applied - by all parties - to ensure the region is rebuilt again. Trust must be restored through economic unity, first and foremost - that is what this plan aims to achieve.)
The Iraq and Afghanistan wars ended with the US famously achieving few to none of its long-term war goals and a huge public and international sentiment against further regime change adventures. If those resisting the US occupation had given up earlier, would the US neocon warmongers have been so thoroughly driven from power? Or would they have been emboldened by the victory and more likely to continue with their promised invasion of Iran?
Russia is a nuclear state, and will in no rational scenario ever "come under attack by the entire world" due to the inevitable consequences. On the other hand, manufacturing casus belli again and invading Ukraine in a few years is an obvious outcome.
> I personally feel that this plan has to proceed, or else the entire world is going to see the conflict expand to our own borders.
It looks like you completely don't understand what you are talking about. This plan just lets Russia a chance to accumulate more resources for further attacks on Ukraine. Why? Because there is no any guarantee for Ukraine against future Russia's aggression. Why? Because Russia will never agree with such guarantee for Ukraine. Russian plan is completely destroy Ukraine as a sovereign state.
I am from Ukraine. That is why I am confident I know that for sure.
And the argument for supporting Ukraine is not to punish anyone. It’s to avoid rewarding (and thus normalizing) aggression and the violation of territorial integrity, a core principle on which the UN is founded.
The main concept in 20th century post-ww2 international relations was the prohibition of aggression to take land. Ending 19th century concepts like “spheres of influence “ that grant “great powers” the right to change borders by force.
Incremental progress would be a peace negotiation which brings both nations back to the realm of economic exchange, and an end to the senseless mass murder of innocents.
>but my ww1!
Its the 21st Century, we are decades removed from that era.
>Incremental progress would be a peace negotiation which brings both nations back to the realm of economic exchange, and an end to the senseless mass murder of innocents.
Again you don't understand what you talking about. There are no negotiations. At all. There is only a proposition for Ukraine to capitulate to Russia: the reduction of the Ukrainian army by more than half, the near-legal recognition of the captured territories as Russian, and so on.
>West will do nothing meaningful to stop them and they know it.
Because the West is guilty of far worse war crimes in the past 50 years, and the whole world knows this. To call Russia to the table for these wars, sets the precedent for other nations to do exactly the same for the USA, the UK, and their allies.[0]
Plus, there's that whole "nuclear annihilation" aspect to consider.
It's not capitulation. It is an attempt to attain peace and economic stability for the region in a way which will prevent the conflict from flaring up again in the near future.
Have you actually read the details of the peace plan, or are you going by media reports, exclusively? Be honest with yourself about this if you wish to discuss it further.
[0] I'm all for prosecution of Russian war crimes, if it leads to the exact same procedures being applied to the USA and its allies. The world is sick of war-monger nations getting away with mass murder.
>> It is an attempt to attain peace and economic stability for the region in a way which will prevent the conflict from flaring up again in the near future.
"Peace for our time!" Some people skipped history lessons. Russia is not winning the war. To give them Ukrainian capitulation is to reward for starting a war.
>> Because the West is guilty of far worse war crimes in the past 50 years, and the whole world knows this.
Typical russian whataboutism. But I bite. What crimes west did in past 30 years? Russia started war in Afghanistan, invaded Syria, Georgia, Ukraine.
>> the details of the peace plan
Nothing there about real punishment russia will get when the next invasion/annexion is going to be.
Just a reminder, russia lost to Ichkeria, signed a peace treaty with Chechen. Guess what happened next? Russians always lie.
Not the person you replied to, but this isn't constructive. Correctly pointing out hypocrisy/double standards is very pertinent to the discussion, and shouldn't be dismissed as "whataboutism". Making assumptions about someone who disagrees with you -- in this case, the assumption that he/she is a Kremlin sympathiser -- is irrelevant at best and insulting at worst.
What crimes of the West? The illegal invasion of Iraq and the murder of 5% of its population - which still suffers, day by day. The destruction of Afghanistan. The destruction of Libya. The funding and support of ISIS. The support of Israels' genocide of Gaza. Somalia. Syria. Yemen. Pakistan. Uganda. Niger. The list goes on and on, why don't you educate yourself here: https://airwars.org/
Or perhaps you think the USA is infallible and should be able to murder whoever its ruling class deems worthy.
>Nothing there about real punishment russia will get when the next invasion/annexion is going to be.
Untrue. If Russia violates the agreement, the door is open for the rest of the world to wage wholesale war on it. You clearly have not read the terms.
5% is backed by data, you just haven't bothered to investigate.
Every single day for decades now Iraqi mothers have given birth to still-born children - 50% of children born in Baghdad - because of the US' use of depleted uranium on the battlefield - a war crime if any other nation were to do it.
This is about as productive as me calling you a bootlicker for empire, which I won't do. I'm not a Russian - I'm simply a member of a co-criminal state in the absolutely phony, criminal 'war on terror', who is willing to hold my government accountable for the heinous crimes committed in my name. Why are you not so willing to take responsibility for our nations war crimes?
Could not find there an estimated 1150000 (5%) deaths in the provided data.
50% still-born children is also fake considering fertility rate 4+ for decade after the war.
You don't need to be a russian to share RT narratives. Also that is what a russian spy will say: "I'm not an agent" because, you know, russians always lie.
Whereas Americans are the most propagandized people on the planet, and are willing to support countless heinous wars based on lies which destroy the lives of millions of innocent human beings, all for the sake of robotic national pride…
You're deeply concerned about US war crimes, but you support a peace deal which specifically gives amnesty for Russian war crimes?
Whataboutism leads to such odd rhetorical distractions. This isn't a deal about Gaza, Afghanistan, or Iraq, and the only reason to discuss them is to distract from Russia's military aggression.
If the USA can be granted amnesty for its war crimes, why can't other nations? /s
I'd rather see ALL war crimes prosecuted - American, Russian, Israeli, Palestinian, and on and on.
But we all know that is never going to happen for as long as the worlds biggest thug nations refuse to allow the people of the world to see such justice.
No, indeed, the USA should face justice for its war crimes, as should Russia, Israel, the UK and any other nation which uses war, subterfuge and subjugation of other nations as the lynchpin of their foreign policy.
Let’s start with the biggest violators, first. That’s the USA. And then we will have the tools to go after Russia and the others.
Abandoning Ukraine will only save money if the US also abandons NATO. After this the Baltic states are next.