The new head of NATO vowed on Tuesday to help shore up Western support for war-ravaged Ukraine and expressed confidence that he can work with whoever is elected president of the United States, the alliance's most powerful member, in November.
“There can be no lasting security in Europe without a strong, independent Ukraine,” new NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said in his first speech on taking office, and he affirmed a commitment made by the organization’s leaders in 2008 that “Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO.”
Russian President Vladimir Putin's forces are making advances in eastern Ukraine. Ukraine’s army has a shaky hold on part of the Kursk region in Russia, which has provided a temporary morale boost, but as casualties mount it remains outmanned and outgunned.
"The cost of supporting Ukraine is far, far lower than the cost we would face if we allow Putin to get his way,” Rutte told reporters, a few hours after his predecessor Jens Stoltenberg handed the reins to him, along with a Viking gavel with which to chair future meetings.
But Ukraine’s NATO membership remains a distant prospect. Several member countries, led by the U.S. and Germany, believe that Ukraine should not join while it’s fighting a war. Rutte declined to speculate about what must happen before it can stand among NATO's ranks.
Rutte did single out China, and particularly Beijing's support for Putin. “China has become a decisive enabler of Russia’s war in Ukraine. China cannot continue to fuel the largest conflict in Europe since the Second World War without this impacting its interests and reputation,” he said.
NATO's new top civilian official also underlined the importance of keeping the trans-Atlantic bond between the United States, Canada and Europe strong, with U.S. elections just a month away.
Surveys suggest the election will be a close race. It could see the return of Donald Trump, whose bluster during his last term of office about low defense spending among European allies and Canada undermined the trust of NATO member countries.
It became an existential challenge, as smaller members feared that the U.S. under Trump would renege on NATO’s security pledge that all countries must come to the rescue of any ally in trouble, the foundation stone the alliance is built on.
But Rutte said: “I know both candidates very well.” He praised Trump for pushing NATO allies to spend more and for toughening their approach toward China. He also hailed the “fantastic record” of Vice President Kamala Harris and described her as “a highly respected leader.”
“I will be able to work with both. Whatever is the outcome of the election,” Rutte said. When pressed about Trump's commitment to the other allies, he deflected, saying only that both candidates “understand that, in the end, the trans-Atlantic relationship is crucial, not just for Europe.”
Asked whether the Netherlands, which has only just reached NATO's spending of 2% of gross domestic product on its defense budget, has set a good example to other allies, Rutte shook his head and said “No. We should have done this earlier.”
Earlier, Stoltenberg had welcomed Rutte to NATO headquarters in Brussels for the change of leadership.
The two men, who first sat together at NATO's table 14 years ago as the leaders of Norway and the Netherlands, greeted each other warmly, before laying a wreath to fallen military personnel, surrounded by the flags of the 32 member countries.
“Mark has the perfect background to become a great secretary general," a visibly emotional Stoltenberg said as he ended a decade in office.
"He has served as prime minister for 14 years and led four different coalition governments, so therefore he knows how to make compromises, create consensus, and these are skills which are very much valued here at NATO,” Stoltenberg said.
Rutte said that he "cannot wait to get to work.” Among his other priorities, he said, are to increase defense spending and strengthen partnerships that the alliance has established with other countries around the world, notably in Asia and the Middle East.
After hundreds of NATO staffers applauded the two men as they moved inside to the great hall where North Atlantic Council meetings are held at the level of ambassadors, ministers or leaders, Stoltenberg helped his successor to get started by presenting him with a Viking gavel to use when chairing meetings.
Stoltenberg, NATO’s 13th secretary-general, took over in 2014, the year that “little green men” from Russia infiltrated Ukraine. Moscow annexed the Crimean Peninsula, sparking a defense spending buildup at the world’s biggest security alliance that gathered pace over his term.
His tenure was surpassed only by Dutch diplomat Joseph Luns, who spent 12 years in charge of NATO.
NATO secretaries-general run the HQ, drive the alliance's working agenda and speak on behalf of the 32-nation organization with one unifying voice. Continuity is usually the key word when they take up office.
© Copyright 2024 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.
100 Comments
wallace
The Russians have paid a heavy price for Putin's war.
What Do Russians Really Think About Putin's War?
And a whopping 66 percent of those surveyed agreed that Russia is paying too high a price for the invasion.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/30/russia-public-opinion-putin-ukraine-war-support/
Cards fan
Remember when the right had a backbone? Now they're content to do whatever Russia, the bully, says. Pathetic.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Then I hope russian mothers are signed up for continual casualties. Demand things you can't afford and you will be disappointed.
He went and sulked in his room, saying nothing specific about Ukraine. That's what liars do.
Russia doesn't get to decide who is in NATO.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Dump doesn't have to win reelection this time and he has more people all in on dictatorship.
Underworld
burgers and beers
"There will be no peace without Ukraine joining NATO. You'd think it'd sink in by now."
Putin didn't invade Ukraine in 2022 because he feared NATO. He invaded because he believed that NATO was weak, that his efforts to regain control of Ukraine by other means had failed, and that installing a pro-Russian government in Kyiv would be safe and easy. His aim was not to defend Russia against some non-existent threat but rather to expand Russia's power, eradicate Ukraine's statehood, and destroy NATO, goals he still pursues
Nobody is trying to weaken Russia, except Russia itself.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Maybe lock me up?
Cards fan
lol Yes. That is exactly what you described. You described Putin's forever war in Ukraine. Just because you can't understand how applicable that quote is to Putin's forever war doesn't mean it isn't.
No what's disingenuous is to take a George Orwell quote out of context to bolster your own authoritarian views. Orwell would have been thoroughly repulsed by Trump and all he represents.
lol
Underworld
burgers and beers
"His ( Putin ) aim was not to defend Russia against some non-existent threat but rather to expand Russia's power, eradicate Ukraine's statehood, and destroy NATO, goals he still pursues."
https://foreignpolicy.com/2024/04/23/russia-ukraine-cultural-genocide-looting-indoctrination-deporatation/
Upon taking control of the Kherson and Zaporizhzhia regions in 2022, Russia launched an aggressive cultural propaganda campaign characterized by the declaration of annexation anniversaries as national holidays, the standardization of cultural practices to align with Russian norms, the establishment of historical propaganda museums, and the re-Sovietization of street names and monuments. These endeavors were aimed at rapidly embedding the occupied territories within the broader Russian cultural and legal fabric, a strategy reminiscent of Russia’s annexation of Crimea and unlike the more fragmented methods employed in the so-called Republics of Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine after 2014.
When Izyum came under occupation in 2022, the establishment of children’s education and cultural centers was prioritized, and such institutions were up and running within weeks. Leveraging educational reforms, patriotic education, and youth organizations, the occupation authorities worked quickly and efficiently to instill a sense of Russian identity among young Ukrainians.
If Trump had stayed in power, he probably would have done Putin's job for him. But Trump had made NATO weaker, hence the timing of the invasion.
TaiwanIsNotChina
By attacking the country, you've virtually assured it in all but name.
John
At least use a creative analogy for your false equivalence.
Some dude
In an ideal world (and no such thing will ever exist) Ukraine would be fast-tracked to NATO membership, and then we'd see just how suicidal Putin really is.
However, as the human race is evidently biologically capable of getting along, I can only see this fighting going on, and on, and on, and on.
Even if somehow Russia is persuaded to get out of Ukraine, some other country will go attack some other country.
What a plague on the earth we homo sapiens are.
lincolnman
Isn't it interesting that our MAGA-friends and Putin-apologists are in lock step in their fantasies?
interesting but not in the least surprising...both exist in an alt-reality far-right bubble where Trump is pasted into a picture helping hurricane victims and Putin denies foreign forces have captured Russian territory for the first time since WW II....
https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/trump-helping-hurricane-victims/
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/why-ukraine-still-in-russia-putin-kursk-incursion-rcna168735
Fascists flock together...
TaiwanIsNotChina
Russia had the chance to not have a militarized border with the world. That ended on February 24th, 2022.
With 30 some million people, Ukraine's army will have a larger number of people in it than your last party. This is sufficient for the patriot.
He's a diplomat. You expect him to say only "President Harris"?
You don't live in Oceania but under Trump you might get there.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Not talking about it joining right this second. Nobody denies that the just declaration from 2008 is still in effect.
Maybe countries should stop expanding into their neighbors then.
I thought it was the nazis or the shelling. Once again russia cannot identify opponents.
Well at the moment no one from the West is dying so I figure we can go on for quite a while. Just like with China, we are not going to let horde state russia get bigger.
Oh look it is the favorite fiction. Easily disproved by:
1) Animals don't just run away after attacking.
2) Russia was in shelling distance of Kharkiv at the time of the fiction.
3) Ukrainians know the maskirovka the best which is why they don't imagine any slight from the UK on this.
Cards fan
You just described Putin's war against Ukraine and his own people. Well done.
Cards fan
Ruined? Trumpist righties love juvenile discourse. That's all Trump has is juvenile discourse. Does the poor old guy even know how tariffs work yet? As he figured it out yet?
Underworld
burgers and beers
Congress thought he would, so they passed a bill to take that power away from the president:
https://thehill.com/homenews/4360407-congress-approves-bill-barring-president-withdrawing-
Yeah. But it backs my point that Trump would have left NATO in a second term.
But he still says that he won’t honor Article 5. Putin lives Trump.
John
The Russians cannot be trusted to stay in their side of internationally recognized borders.
They had their chance to withdraw on their own terms and decided not to.
So now they get to leave the hard way.
And Russia doesn’t dictate who joins a defensive alliance.
If it doesn’t like NATO on its borders, it shouldn’t have invaded a sovereign state on a bs lie.
Cards fan
You might have a point if I gave my opinion. I didn't though, I merely pointed out that Russia is invading Ukraine, and that Putin has openly said Ukraine was never a proper state. Both of those are facts- not my opinion.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Ukraine also wants the invading animals culled so it is a win win.
Well since the claim is that there will be no peace while Ukraine is able to choose its defense arrangements, where does Putin finally get stopped?
1) Animals don't just run away after attacking.
2) Russia was in shelling distance of Kharkiv at the time of the fiction.
3) Ukrainians know the maskirovka the best which is why they don't imagine any slight from the UK on this.
Last annexed land in 1898.
Underworld
burgers and beers
Oh, if Trump had a second term, he would have left NATO.
Underworld
burgers and beers
Oh, if Trump had a second term, he would have left NATO.
Congress thought he would, so they passed a bill to take that power away from the president:
https://thehill.com/homenews/4360407-congress-approves-bill-barring-president-withdrawing-nato/amp/
wtfjapan
There will be no Ukraine in NATO. Won’t be happening.
they said that with Sweden and Finland also
Underworld
burgers and beers
"Nobody cares. Russia has the Collective Security Treaty Organization alliance, and the US makes no fuss".
Au contrare. Belarus, a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, just started hosting Russian nuclear missiles.
Did you see a freak out by the West? Yet this is the exact threat that you are saying Russia is so afraid of!
TaiwanIsNotChina
A valid question. Nuclear brinkmanship does work which is why we need to get everyone under NATO we can and get the US's Asian allies their nukes as well.
Underworld
JJE
There will be no peace without Ukraine joining NATO.
You'd think it'd sink in by now.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Because they understand strategy and that land is invaluable.
Underworld
Blacklabel
Yup. And now Finland is part of NATO.
Oh, you mean Ukraine? Well, they didn't mind when Finland became a member, so I can't see this as a problem.
Seriously though, unless Ukraine has security guarantees, they can't sign a peace deal.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Only if they have the bodies to make it happen which they don't.
Russia only controls what the marauding hordes have been able to take.
TaiwanIsNotChina
There are no US bases of any consequence in Eastern Europe. Also the Cuban Missile Crisis was about nukes as you ignore all of the time.
Free Ukraine doesn't have to put anything in its constitution based on the whims of thugs.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Names or nonsense. Sources of nukes in Eastern Europe or nonsense.
To prevent the exact invasion going on right now.
The US was blessed with two peaceful neighbors. Russia was blessed with more land than anyone has ever seen. Doesn't mean we get to take from others. Also Russia still a regional power.
TaiwanIsNotChina
So basically whatever russia and their mouthpieces say is a base is a base? How convenient.
Not with subjugations and annexations.
Underworld
burgers and beers
No newly added NATO country has nuclear missiles as part of policy. So completely different.
There was no such promise.
But so now you are saying that they invaded Ukraine in 2022, when they weren't looking at joining NATO, and even if they did, NATO has a policy not to put nuclear missiles on new NATO countries, but they might change it.
And yet Finland, which has a massive border with Russia joins NATO and nothing...
Nobody cares. Russia has the Collective Security Treaty Organization alliance, and the US makes no fuss.
Underworld
burgers and beers
"But so now you are saying that they invaded Ukraine in 2022, when they weren't looking at joining NATO"
Yep. And? So why invade in 2022 and not 2008? In 2022 Ukraine weren't looking to join NATO.
....There was no such promise.
So what agreement or treaty was this promise in?
Underworld
burgers and beers
Yep. And? So why invade in 2022 and not 2008? In 2022 Ukraine weren't looking to join NATO."
Yeah. The cause and effect is quite the stretch. There is the 14 years between those events!
TaiwanIsNotChina
The US has plenty of rare earths. Defending Ukraine is more about defeating savagery.
John
Ukraine will be in NATO and Putin is getting flushed into the septic tank of history.
Cards fan
du-hur, I dunno. Maybe the fact he's illegally invaded the country and attempted to steal a solid chunk of the land for himself is an indication he wants to eradicate Ukraine? Or uh, I dunno, maybe how he talks about how Ukraine was never a legitimate state? I say this is pretty good proof Putin wants to eradicate Ukraine, but I'm not a Kremlin hack.
Underworld
burgers and beers
Ukraine as one giant NATO base would be pretty consequential to Kremlin apparently....No US troops = No US base.
The US would not care if the Warsaw pact still existed.
Funny how Finland joined NATO and there was no big fuss.
Underworld
Zaphod
There are no US bases of any consequence in Eastern Europe. Also the Cuban Missile Crisis was about nukes as you ignore all of the time.
Because Russia is an imperialist that invades countries and annexes.
Nope. They weren't. And they weren't looking to when Russia invaded in 2022.
Sure. But NATO expansion didn't encroach on Russia's security interests.
And why no fuss when Finland joins NATO?
Seems like it.
Underworld
Zaphod
Funny how Finland joined NATO and there was no big fuss.
Why not? Because they have a big border with Russia, so your security interests argument falls flat?
Nobody poked the bear at all.
Obviously, in reality there is always the proverbial straw that breaks the camels back. And in case of Nato expansion that would be US bases and missiles in UKR and Georgia.
And if you say that Russia doesn't trust that, then they could add missile bases in Finland.
But Finland doesn't pose a security threat?
Do you see how silly that sounds?
Saying it many times doesn't make it true.
Underworld
burgers and beers
Au contrare. Belarus, a member of the Collective Security Treaty Organization, just started hosting Russian nuclear missiles."
Many European nations, members of NATO have borders with Belarus. Like Poland. NATO is not a US org, it is mostly European.
Underworld
burgers and beers
Yeah. The cause and effect is quite the stretch. There is the 14 years between those events!"
Well after Russia invaded in 2014, annexed Crimea and started the war in the Donbas, who could blame them. But there was no NATO event in 2022 that explains why Russia invaded.
Putin didn't invade Ukraine in 2022 because he feared NATO. He invaded because he believed that NATO was weak, that his efforts to regain control of Ukraine by other means had failed, and that installing a pro-Russian government in Kyiv would be safe and easy. His aim was not to defend Russia against some non-existent threat but rather to expand Russia's power, eradicate Ukraine's statehood, and destroy NATO, goals he still pursues
Underworld
Zaphod
Well those were nuclear missiles. No newly added NATO country has nuclear missiles as part of policy. So completely different.
Nope. Without security guarantees, you can’t have peace.
No. They have not.
burgers and beers
Au contraire? Really ? Since when is Belarus on Uncle Sam's borders? Apples and oranges, again.
burgers and beers
Over the 14 years the NATO commitment for Ukraine with NATO bases grew stronger not weaker.
TaiwanIsNotChina
Ukraine's rightful place is in NATO.
TaiwanIsNotChina
No, the little green men were not cosplaying Donbas residents. These are not that same thing.
JJE
Moscow gets to decide who controls the European invasion routes into Moscow.
This is not up for debate with NATO, or anyone, and it must be a hard one to understand but Moscow will simply not allow NATO and their supplicants to drop their anchors in Sevastopol or commit other infractions which impinge upon public decency.
Simply won't happen.
Zaphod
Underworld
Of course there were complaints. But Finland is not the red line that has been explained many times. UKR and Georgia are.
This argument that it was OK here and there is so nonsensical. So because you poked the sleeping bear many times before, you can poke it endlessly, and it will never wake up and bite you? Obviously, in reality there is always the proverbial straw that breaks the camels back. And in case of Nato expansion that would be US bases and missiles in UKR and Georgia. As has been explained many times.
Zaphod
TaiwanIsNotChina
That is word salad. Fact is, Nato is screen for US military power, and UKR as part of the US military machine is unacceptable to any Russian government, past and future, as long as Russia as a state exists. And that has nothing to do with the much maligned Putin.
burgers and beers
"Many European nations, members of NATO have borders with Belarus. Like Poland. NATO is not a US org, it is mostly European."
But we were talking about hostile bases on US borders. Goal post shifting. I'm sure Poland is not happy about it either though.
Underworld
burgers and beers
"Many European nations, members of NATO have borders with Belarus. Like Poland. NATO is not a US org, it is mostly European."
No we weren't.
No they aren't. But they don't threaten to invade Belarus because of it.
burgers and beers
" I was told definitively there are plenty US bases in Eastern Europe, which without evidence is even less nutritious than salad."
It seems to confuse spelling of US bases and NATO bases.
The "go to " answer when there is no retort.
burgers and beers
Yes , we were. Unless you now suddenly pretend not to understand that " Uncle Sam borders " mean US borders. But that's OK , there does seem to be a lot of confusion about US borders these days. Large volumes of word salad flying around :) Elections...
Blacklabel
Oh so the plan IS for NATO to incite Russia by putting a new fully armed member on the border with Russia, against Russian wishes?
Antiquesaving
The article is cope.
The Financial Times
Sorry paywall
https://www.ft.com/content/b9396112-585a-4f7e-9628-13d500c99d93
Now tell us the Financial Times is pro Kremlin.
TaiwanIsNotChina
No US troops = No US base.
It's Ukraine's house. You don't get to tell people what they do in their house.
The most disgusting and long lasting ones do.
burgers and beers
"So basically whatever russia and their mouthpieces say is a base is a base? How convenient."
Well NATO base is a NATO base, despite our Washington expert friends saying it isn't. It might be an inconvenient truth.
Still invasions and Uncle Sam still the undisputed invasion champion of the century.
burgers and beers
Yeah. But it backs my point that Trump would have left NATO in a second term.
I still don't think he would, but I can see why Congress wanted to make/score a political point.
LOL, yeah...sure.
burgers and beers
"But so now you are saying that they invaded Ukraine in 2022, when they weren't looking at joining NATO"
Re-read the above article. The new NATO boss clearly says commitment was made by NATO way back in 2008 that Ukraine's place is in NATO.
"New NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte said in his first speech on taking office, and he affirmed a commitment made by the organization’s leaders in 2008 that “Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO....”
There was.
proxy
Ugledar is a real game changer and not the type the supporters of this proxy war had hoped for. The path for Russia is open in the south and west.
Zelensky knows he is done and there will be no exile for him as he knows where all the money went and he can't be allowed to have that information.
Blacklabel
Why would NATO admit a country with unsolved corruption issues and a 1 trillion dollar reconstruction burden?
Blacklabel
Finland has a smaller amount of people in their army than my last party.
didn’t come with 1 trillion of debt and a corruption problem either.
Blacklabel
The war is not meant to be won, it is meant to be continuous. Hierarchical society is only possible on the basis of poverty and ignorance…
…The war is waged by the ruling group against its own subjects and its object is not the victory over either Eurasia or East Asia, but to keep the very structure of society intact.
-George Orwell
burgers and beers
Cards fan - du-hur, I dunno. Maybe the fact he's illegally invaded the country and attempted to steal a solid chunk of the land for himself is an indication he wants to eradicate Ukraine?
Istanbul negotiations had a fair offer on the table for both parties until BoJo flew in on behalf of the neocon interests to sabotage it. I asked for credible proof of the other poster's statement that " Putin's aim was to eradicate Ukraine and destroy NATO " . Your opinion does not provide a credible proof of either. Duuh..
Zaphod
TaiwanIsNotChina
There are plenty of bases, and trusting American statements about nukes would be ridiculous. If Nato membership is such trivial thing, then why clamour for Nato membership? The fact remains that Ukraine and Georgia in Nato are the brightest of all red lines, that no Russian government could ever allow to be crossed. Everybody acknowledges that the US has national security interests.... and that is a continent with no hostile borders. But the other nuclear superpower, surrounded on land and countless times invaded, is supposed to have none?
Is geopolitics such a difficult concept?
burgers and beers
Not all " invasions of a sovereign state based on a lie" result in annexation, true.
burgers and beers
NATO base = NATO base. Just like Uncle Sam wouldn't tolerate good old Warsaw Pact base on its border.
The Washington bosses do that all the time.
burgers and beers
Congress thought he would, so they passed a bill to take that power away from the president:
https://thehill.com/homenews/4360407-congress-approves-bill-barring-president-withdrawing-
Seems US leaving NATO is not happening then. Even if Trump becomes POTUS again. You can rest easily then.
burgers and beers
"Nobody cares. Russia has the Collective Security Treaty Organization alliance, and the US makes no fuss".
There are no countries planning to join the Collective Security Treaty Organization and have hostile bases on Uncle Sam's borders. Apples and oranges.
burgers and beers
Yep. And? So why invade in 2022 and not 2008? In 2022 Ukraine weren't looking to join NATO."
Seriously? Is it really that hard to comprehend what the new NATO Secretary General said about NATO's commitment to Ukraine membership from all the way back in 2008 in the quote above or are you just pretending?
TaiwanIsNotChina
I was told definitively there are plenty US bases in Eastern Europe, which without evidence is even less nutritious than salad.
Tell us again how you aren't from Russia or one of it's client states.
Blacklabel
There will be no Ukraine in NATO. Won’t be happening.
burgers and beers
"Well at the moment no one from the West is dying so I figure we can go on for quite a while. "
Exactly, thanks for reinforcing the obvious. That Washington war hawks and their mouthpieces don't care about destruction of Ukraine and Ukrainian lives at all. As long as someone else is doing the dying for their long term strategic goals they want to prolong the conflict. Until the last Ukrainian is their motto. As you consistently say, it is a great deal for senile Joe administration.
burgers and beers
"His ( Putin ) aim was not to defend Russia against some non-existent threat but rather to expand Russia's power, eradicate Ukraine's statehood, and destroy NATO, goals he still pursues."
Eradicate Ukraine and destroy NATO? Nah, those are just Washington / Brussels talking points . Credible proof of the above statement or it didn't happen.
burgers and beers
" it shouldn’t have invaded a sovereign state on a bs lie."
Trying to lecture others about "invading sovereign states based on a lie" is pretty funny. Some say Washington hacks have a good sense of humor, could be true.
burgers and beers
No proof of either Trump or Putin wanting to destroy NATO. That is just Biden / Harris White House talking point.
burgers and beers
No newly added NATO country has nuclear missiles as part of policy. So completely different.
Policies can and do change. Russia not trusting " not an inch eastwards" NATO promises is not surprising. Just as US wouldn't rust Warsaw pact bases on its border.
JJE
So, the Brussels cabal will extend article 5 over territory that is contested by and against the biggest nuclear power...
Pull the other one.
JJE
AKA an organic color revolution.
JJE
Then there is no peace deal then. A neutralist Ukraine will be the only way out of this for them. Moscow won't allow NATO on the traditional invasion routes into European Russia. That's it. Don't hold your breath till it sinks in.
burgers and beers
"new NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte ... affirmed a commitment made by the organization’s leaders in 2008 that “Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO.”"
New NATO Secretary -General must be gravely mistaken or AP is spreading fake news. According to our Washington propaganda friends nobody was talking about Ukraine joining NATO prior to 2022. Putin made that up according to them.
JJE
Good point. Putin told them then and other times from 2008 that would be unacceptable (he was actually at the meeting, in Bucharest, where it was brazenly declared).
Right then and still right now.
NATO doesn't get to just add countries with the stroke of a pen. Foolishness of the first order.
burgers and beers
Even if somehow Russia is persuaded to get out of Ukraine, some other country will go attack some other country. What a plague on the earth we homo sapiens are.
No doubt about that. Happening as we speak. Like the Matrix fame agent Smith said -humans are like a virus on the earth.
Antiquesaving
So Vuhledar has finally been taken by Russia 1 year 11 months 3 days after it was first attacked.
Now this long time will get the pro Ukraine going " couldn't even take this small town" Blah blah blah.
But the reason it took so long is because Ukraine designed it that way, it is and was designed in the Soviet era as a fortress city precisely to block any advance.
Now that it has fallen the road west has barely any real defensive positions beyond Vuhledar.
But how and why could Russia finally take this fortress in a matter of around a month after trying for nearly 22 months and failing?
Well like all the rest, Blame it of the Kursk PR stunt.
No reinforcements could be sent to Vuhledar of anywhere else because Ukraine has put everything into Kursk which they are now losing also.
All you need to do is look at the map of today and of before Kursk.
Yes it was as plenty of western pundits said a stalemate in the Donetsk region but suddenly Russia advances and hasn't stopped, and exactly when did this advance start? Oh right just after Ukraine went into Kursk.
Zaphod
This guy is asking for WW3. American bases and missiles in the Ukraine is as acceptable to any Russian government as Sovjet missiles in Cuba are to any American government. The most essential part of any diplomatic solution to this conflict is neutrality for Ukraine in its constitution. Anything else can be negotiated, but not that.
And that is no secret, diplomats and scholars have explained this for years.
burgers and beers
Oh, if Trump had a second term, he would have left NATO.
No he wouldn't.
bass4funk
Oh, without a doubt.
Blacklabel
I do like that he says “any” President.
means he like most others is coming to the realization that it will more than likely be Trump.
otherwise such a comment would be unnecessary.
burgers and beers
"There will be no peace without Ukraine joining NATO. You'd think it'd sink in by now."
Ukraine in NATO is a non starter for Kremlin and a prime reason why the war came about in the first place. It will sink in D.C./ Brussels eventually. The only question is how many more on both sides will have to perish until western neocons hawks abandon their long term fantasies of strategically weakening and defeating Russia. Unfortunately they are still not interested in peace and prefer to prolong the conflict. That's why they sabotaged the Istanbul peace talks in the first place.
Blacklabel
zero credibility. Ruined by juvenile level discourse.
Antiquesaving
So NATO leaders say blah blah blah, then each western news, leader Zelensky, say blah blah blah and inevitably they will repeat it again and again despite the opposite happening at the frontline.
And again in a few weeks we will be told the same thing as Russia advances more and more.
Now cue the 72 hours trope, the 500,000, 700,000 1 million 200 million Russians killed, the Russia is running out of weapons, etc...
Don't people get tired of the same delusions.
Really, where?
To whom, all it did was deplete the resources in the East and South East to the point Russia has advanced in far more important areas of Ukraine than Kursk is to Russia.
Perhaps some here may like to see the advance and see a real independent assessment of each side's gains and losses including what is actually still available to fight on both sides.
https://youtu.be/4QRRZuKuhLo?si=N0VBgUaU0_BMipKp
History ledgend isn't Russian or Ukrainian. He just looks at the information and facts available without either sides propaganda and up until now he has be far more accurate than and Russian propaganda or west government, news or analysts.
He points out that Ukraine has barely anything left in weapons and the problem is not to most NATO countries with the exception of the USA. And Russia still has plenty. If you want to know how that is then see his explanation.
burgers and beers
There are no US bases of any consequence in Eastern Europe.
Ukraine as one giant NATO base would be pretty consequential to Kremlin apparently.
This guy is asking for WW3. American bases and missiles in the Ukraine is as acceptable to any Russian government as Sovjet missiles in Cuba are to any American government. The most essential part of any diplomatic solution to this conflict is neutrality for Ukraine in its constitution. Anything else can be negotiated, but not that.
Yep, seems that is the Kremlin take on things. Russia's backyard.
JJE
Ukraine will never join NATO.
You'd think it'd sink in by now.
JJE
This guy is an errand boy sent by grocery clerks (Washington) to collect a bill.
They should inform him the last coking coal mine in Ukraine (which also has extensive strategic minerals in the region), at Vuhelar has already fallen. No more rare earths, lithium etc for him/them.
Blacklabel
oddly I didn’t during 2017-2021, what’s different this time?
Banthu
The Biden/Kamala administration has refused to allow Zelensky to use weapons against targets deep inside Russia away from the conflict zone.
Why are Biden/Kamala appeasing Putin's demands instead of standing with Ukraine?
bass4funk
Yes, and pork is Halal
Blacklabel
No actually I didn’t describe any such thing.
you have poor reading comprehension of a quote from someone else and try to disingenuously apply it to support what you wrongly think.
that’s on you, not me.