Ceasefire Without Political Settlement - Another Minsk Agreement?
Ambassador Chas Freemen with Prof. Glenn Diesen
I had the great pleasure of speaking with Ambassador Chas Freeman regarding the US-Ukraine deal for a 30-day ceasefire. The agreement does not provide any political solutions and would likely be used by the US and the Europeans to pump more weapons into Ukraine. Statements from the British suggest that they may use the ceasefire to place their troops within Ukraine. This is happening at a time that Ukrainian position in Kursk has completely collapsed. Zelensky and the Europeans argue that if Russia does not accept the ceasefire, then the US must respond strongly against Russia. This seems to be seen as an opportunity by Zelensky and the Europeans to win the US back over and return to a long war. However, is there more to this? Ambassador Freeman suggests that it could be a tactical move by the Trump administration to get Zelensky and the Europeans to at least accept the need for diplomacy and negotiations, and that this ceasefire is merely a starting position to negotiate with Russia.
Clearly, the 'ceasefire' is simply a delaying tactic and of course, part of the USNATO propaganda war against Russia. The US has never stopped supplying weapons and intelligence support to the Kiev regime, the long term objective of the Empire is, as it's always been, the military and strategic defeat of the Russian Federation.
Thank you for this analysis, Glenn, good info. I think the 30 day cease fire is a tactical move by President Trump to gain more support for stopping the war. Additionally, the at times tough rhetoric against Russia is an attempt to placate/appease war mongers in NATO (Starmer, Macron) who want to keep war going, and who have often accused Trump of being an apologist for Putin.
But yesterday Zelensky showed his true colors, indicating that he has no interest in stopping the war permanently. That is because Zelenskyy said that he will not agree to cede any land gained by Russia during the war, including Crimea. That is a position that everyone knows Russia will reject, including the United States. Ukraine is losing, they are in no position to dictate the terms. And the longer this war goes on, the more territory Ukraine will lose.
Many in the west have been spoon fed anti -Putin propaganda for decades by MSM, so as a result he is viewed negatively by many.
And when it comes to the Russia/Ukraine, war, Mainstream media in the West have mostly presented one side (the anti Russia side).
But there are two sides to every story, and in this case if we look at history and what has led to the current war between Russia and Ukraine, NATO is far from guiltless. Please read my perspective about it, and Apologies ahead of time for the lack of spacing in the column (tried to correct, but had no luck.).
https://open.substack.com/pub/swlion26/p/who-is-responsible-for-the-russiaukraine?r=q9u1t&utm_medium=ios&utm_source=post-publish