Turkey Urges A Humanitarian Ceasefire

But what is their agenda, and does any country trust Russia?

Call me skeptical if you will, but when I first heard that Turkey was rushing to be an intermediary between Ukraine and Russia, immediately I thought, ‘What’s in it for them?’ Turkey wants to be in the EU, but it has been stated it will never happen while the Cyprus issue still exists. Back in 1974, Turkey invaded Cyprus and controlled what they call Northern Cyprus or what the rest of the world calls occupied by Turkey, and there is a part called ‘no man’s land’. (I’ve been there and it is eerie). There is the ‘Green Line’ buffer zone that is maintained by the UN that exists to prevent any escalation of conflict. The problem is that Turkey won’t give up the territory and that appears to be a condition of EU membership.

Why is Erdogan such an eager beaver? This is a platform to show the EU what a diplomat he is and that does seek peace. To be heralded as the person who helped broker a peace deal would help elevate his status in the world, and the EU have to be grateful to him and hope that this will help admit Turkey into the EU. Erdogan was reported to have said that ‘fair peace’ will not have a loser. That is 100% incorrect if you ever have studied history, for each side loses something and there is always a loser who has had to concede more, either due to a loss of troops, or because there are no funds to finance the war any longer.

The aggressor only agrees to end the war if they can get a percentage of what they wanted, and to leave the door open to obtaining the rest later. The defender is usually forced to agree to a negotiation as they have a high death toll, mass destruction (that will cost to rebuild) the economy will have suffered, and because they did not plan the war they will be bankrupt financing their defence. That is what Ukraine is suffering from because they did not have sufficient resources to prepare for a full scale attack.

What Erdogan is pushing for is a humanitarian ceasefire, because this will appeal to the masses who mainly see the humanitarian crisis. Unless you are well acquainted with the history of the USSR, the Cold War, all the motives of the previous Russian leaders, key players in the Kremlin, a working knowledge of both world wars and the who made false promises (Stalin), and which countries were invaded by whom, and which countries back then supported them and why, you will understand this is a historical war based on power, pride, plus money as Ukraine is rich in energy supplies. I don’t know all of the above in detail, but some elements which is why I do listen to the experts who have studied and lived through the Cold War, for they have a better handle of what Putin’s intentions are. We cannot take what the Russians say at face value, and only a fool would do so.

A humanitarian ceasefire will not address the underlying longterm issues of sovereignty which are more important. You may ask why that is for surely lives are more important, but ask Ukrainians—do they want to live in an occupied state or bring up their children in one?

In the pre-internet days, those of us in the West relied on newspapers and history books to tell us about Ukraine and Russia. Most of us were led to believe that Ukraine was a mini Russia and that is what they wanted. I recall taking to a friend who had a Russian surname and I asked them about the origins, and we talked fondly of borscht, and they corrected me that it was Ukrainian. With new technology, we can actually see and hear what Ukrainians actually think and want, and that matters, more than what Macron, Biden, Johnson, or what the UN think. They do want the freedom and independence of the West, but their transition from Communist state to a democratic one has been hindered by corrupt pro-Russian puppets governing Ukraine.

As soon as the Cold War was over, states that suddenly found they were free knew that had to hold onto that through alliances, before Russia had time to regroup. That meant to they needed to join NATO and the EU as quickly as possible in order to protect themselves, because they knew Russia would make an attempt to reclaim their territories again. Ukraine didn’t, and one assumed that was because they didn’t want to join, but the truth is that a corrupt government prevented them from joining. Being so close to the Russian border meant that pro-Russian parties could influence Ukrainian politics easily, and those who opposed it had the freedom to leave and live in the West.

The states that sought NATO and EU membership were keen to break the communist ties, and by joining these alliances it would prevent factions within the countries to try and reinstate Communism which was a threat.

• The Visegrad Group was formed on 15th February 1991, and comprised of the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Poland, and Hungary with the aim of joining NATO and then the EU. That would help with the economy and free movement of the citizens to allow people to have democratic choices, plus an alliance to come to their aid if Russia became an issue.

• The Czech Republic, Poland and Hungary joined the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in 1999.

• In 2004, Estonia, Lithuania, Bulgaria, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Latvia all joined NATO

• In 2004, several former Soviet states, and states vulnerable to Russian attacks had joined the EU. The Czech Republic, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and Slovenia all joined at the same time

The question some may ask is why didn’t Ukraine join in with these alliances of the former Soviet states? This is important for people to understand, because some are blaming Ukraine for failing to join these alliances and for failing to be prepared for a Russian attack. This is where we look at the governments within Ukraine since 1991, that have stalled democracy and who have aided Russia and Putin. The transition from communism to democracy has been and is a difficult one as Ukraine shares a border with Russia. This is a list of the previous Ukrainian presidents.

• Leonid Makarovych Kravchuk 1991-1994 (resigned) but was a moderate who satisfied both parties as the first president.

• Leonid Kuchma 1994-2005 (mired by corruption, election fraud). He kept ties with Russia, but was in talks with the EU and NATO to consider joining the alliances in 2003-2004.

• Viktor Andriyovych Yushchenko 2005-2010. Survived an assassination attempt (poison), and advocated EU and NATO membership. Under his government which saw many changes, he tried implant new measures for Ukraine that would lead to stability.

• Viktor Fedorovych Yanukovyc 2010-2014 (removed during Maidan Uprising). Is a pro-Russian politician who has been convicted of treason and corruption, and is in exile in Russia although he was sentenced to 13 years imprisonment in 2019. He rejected the Ukrainian-European Association Agreement, thus blocking EU membership, and his own election was deemed to have been fraudulent. The illegal annexation of Crimea occurred while Yanukovyc was fleeing Ukraine to Russia, who offered him protection. He is seen as a Russian puppet, and also halted discussions to join NATO. Many consider him to be placed as the Ukrainian president should Ukraine fall into the hands of the Russians.

• Petro Oleksiyovych Poroshenko. 2014-2019. He began the EU membership process by signing the European Union–Ukraine Association Agreement. He also declared he would hold a referendum on NATO membership in 2014 and 2017, and stated NATO membership was necessary as a defensive measure against Russia. He is facing charges of corruption, tax evasion, money laundering, and the theft of classified information. He moved to Warsaw, but chose to return to defend Ukraine in January 2022 despite the court case against him.

• Volodymyr Oleksandrovych Zelenskyy. May 2019- present day. Seeks EU and NATO membership to help defend Ukraine and to help build democracy in the country.

From what you can see, the previous presidents were a mix of corrupt and moderate officials, and between 2010-2014, progress for EU and NATO talks were halted. The country was unstable and there were constant attempts by pro-Russian factions that were trying to oust the democratic parties. Perhaps Zelenskyy should have acted sooner, whereas now he has no choice but to act.

Does anyone actually believe what the Kremlin says? I don’t, and I dare say I am not alone when they claim they are seeing a peace deal. As for the West, if they see this as a reason not to deliver arms then that is unwise. Are they falling for Russian ‘promises’? If you read the propaganda they are spreading you can see the disinformation they are spreading.

Day 34 (29 March)

• Russia has claimed they will reduce attacks around Kyiv during the negotiations to create ‘mutual trust’.

• Turkey has been suggested as a guarantor for a peace treaty. THAT IS THE WORST IDEA I HAVE EVER HEARD, and would serve Turkey and Russia and not Ukraine. Other countries that have been put forward are Poland, Israel and Canada. Only Canada out of the suggestions is a viable option, as Poland is vulnerable, and Israel is not strong enough or stable enough to deal with Russia if they renege on the peace deal (and if there is a deal, we expect Russia to renege on it eventually).

• Claims have been made that Russia has dropped the ridiculous denazification demand from the negotiations. It was purely thrown in as a justification for the invasion, and had no merit.

• India and China are still buying discounted Russian crude oil.

• The targeted attacks on fuel depots is to immobilize the Ukrainian troops and to cause mass destruction.

• Talks in Turkey included the defence minister from Ukraine, Oleksii Reznikov and Michael Podolyak from the President’s Office.

• Zelenskyy in his address last night reiterated that the West need to act not just for Ukraine but for themselves. He states that Ukrainians are dying because the world is waiting for Russia to respond, and because the West are too afraid to supply the necessary weapons needed to defend Ukraine.

  “Fear always makes you an accomplice” he says. I would add that a failure to act enables and makes you an accomplice. If the West think their hands are clean of the Ukrainian deaths, generations after us may judge otherwise.

• Russian propaganda continues as the Kremlin claims that Putin has the support of the Russians in the war.

• The Russians claim that the reports that Roman Abramovich was potentially poisoned is propaganda and is untrue. Abramovich arrived in Istanbul for talks today. He is representing himself and neither party. Most of these talks are aimed at a ceasefire so that sanctions can be lifted and businesses can return to trading. In the end, it is about money.

• Neutrality is on the table, and Russia doesn’t object to EU membership (like they have a say?) as long as it doesn’t have a military presence. In return, Zelenskyy will consider this as long as there are third party guarantees. I’m struggling to find an example where a security guarantor has been successful, because none have ever worked long term. They work short term, and employ the usual sanctions and suspensions, because that is all they can do. Generally, these peace agreements last a few years in order to gain a ceasefire, then there is a change in government and uprisings start again. You only have to look at the ICC, UN, and NATO all telling Russia to stop and they haven’t. That is the extent of the power of a guarantor.

• If Zelenskyy truly believes he can gain security guarantees from other countries, then his inexperience is showing. The only security guarantee he can ever have is NATO membership which is a deterrent more than anything else. Why does Russian oppose NATO membership unless they intend to invade Ukraine again?

• Perhaps both sides are agreeing to the negotiations knowing they will ‘fail’ to buy time? Ukraine, for the West to deliver weapons, and Russia so they can bring in mercenaries and new supplies.

• How can Ukraine hold a referendum with millions displaced? Like Brexit, the government will have to spell out what ‘neutrality’ means in plain language. I guess we pretty much know most Ukrainians don’t trust Russia, and to know they will never have NATO protection would not inspire confidence either.

• Another issue is Crimea, where it has been proposed that a 15 year consultation period be put forward, so basically put the issue on hold and perhaps hold a referendum to ask the citizens what they want.

• Zelenskyy addressed the Danish Parliament today, and will readdress all the governments again in order to gain weapons to defend Ukraine and democracy.

• Zelenskyy to address the Australian Parliament on Thursday.

• Even if a peace deal is secured, it will not stop the ICC from investigating war crimes and to issue arrest warrants for those responsible. I doubt Russia cares because it is a case of ‘catch and arrest me if you can’.

• Russian propaganda continues like Nazi propaganda did with pamphlets aimed at the locals.