Calls to “fight until the 1991 borders” often come from those who will not personally join the infantry, yet urge others to do so. At the same time, the overwhelming majority of Ukrainians are unwilling to cede territory de jure, making such demands equally absurd

@Tatarigami_UA Of course, that would be a great outcome. But from what I'm reading on Twitter, Ukraine's position is slowly deteriorating, with current trajectory, Russia wins. So why would Russia decide not to continue the path that seems to lead to victory?

@of_smeg That’s the problem - the situation is deteriorating, but the scale of deterioration is optically exaggerated because Russia is deliberately speeding up its advances. They’re trying to gain as much as possible for negotiations to have the upper hand. The situation will stabilize

@Tatarigami_UA The problem is that if Russia wanted to stop advancing, it could do so at any time. But it doesn't. By the inherent logic of negotiations, something of value has to be traded in exchange. But what is there, that Ukraine would be willing to sacrifice, and Russia would accept?

@glaebhoerl Russia won’t lose hundreds of thousands more people and the remnants of its economy for a chance to take Kramatorsk in 2027

@Tatarigami_UA But from Vance interview I understood that separation will be on administrative borders

@im1129 What Vance says is largely irrelevant. He will just repeat what Trump says, and Trump will change his opinion three times before and after lunch.

@Tatarigami_UA Every time the urgency drops, 🇷🇺 gains space to reconstitute. This happened before, as I'm sure you will agree. How can this be avoided?

@FilTri9 It can’t be avoided. But we also need to create minefields, build fortifications, and prepare.

@Tatarigami_UA навіщо росії зупиняти війну якщо в економіці для неї не стане краще чи є зараз?

@IvanGolos2 Вони зможуть знизити витрати на війну, і їм не доведеться виплачувати стільки грошей рекрутам під час підписання контракту, адже відпаде потреба в наборі 30 - 40 тисяч осіб щомісяця.

@Tatarigami_UA He only wants to win that Trophy; he doesn't care about any real consequence at all.

@Tatarigami_UA freezing the front lines just gives moscovia time to regroup and attack again. ukraine needs weapons, not half-baked ‘realistic outcomes’ that reward aggression.

@Tatarigami_UA Yeah, freezing the line, while russia stays sanctioned, and say agrees to distribute foreign soldiers along the line of contact and a referendum in the next 5 years under OSCE...

@Tatarigami_UA freezing the front is the best we can hope for right now but the sanctions leverage is crucial to prevent any further escalation

@Tatarigami_UA agreed. i am praying for this

@Tatarigami_UA Russia isn't interested in a ceasefire they are winning. They will likely have a counter offer to end the war.

@Tatarigami_UA Lifting sanctions should only come after giving back territories, they need to lose something to not try it again

@Tatarigami_UA How do you compel Russia to freeze the lines without the incentive of (some) sanctions relief?

@Tatarigami_UA Freezing the lines is not a good proposal, objectively speaking, because Russia is gaining territory each day. If you want Russia to stop fighting for X months, you have to give it the territory it would have taken each day of those months, otherwise a stop has no merit to them.

@Tatarigami_UA Confiscate russian central bank assets, lift sanctions when 1991 borders are restored

@Tatarigami_UA The problem is that nobody is going to enforce the current frontlines. So any agreement might not last more than an hour at best.

@Tatarigami_UA Unfortunately, I don’t think there’s a chance Putin will agree to settlement that doesn’t freeze current frontline and lift all U.S. and European sanctions. Putin, with good reason, still appears to believe Trump will support a settlement that gives Russia uncaptured territory.

@Tatarigami_UA That plus the possible lack of investment of european countries after the deal, because the urgency will diminish in their views.

@Tatarigami_UA Russia would not agree to freeze the conflict 'on the current lines'. Why would they do it third time?

@Tatarigami_UA Seems like that's the consensus. Especially any freeze that doesn't allow Ukraine to rebuild its military, because Russia will.

@Tatarigami_UA It should only be and will be up to the ukrainian people. Do not accept any foreign pressure. If you are are okay with some deal, Europe will accept. If Ukraine rejects it we should continue to support Ukraine as long as Ukraine wants to keep up the fight. That's it

@Tatarigami_UA Yes, lifting sanctions (and therefore accepting the current Russia regime perpetual existence) can invalidate any other gain. Even Yalta (1.0) got eventually corrected by USSR collapse.

@Tatarigami_UA Dear god no - Russia will jump on the baltics. But yes, for Ukraine yes

@Tatarigami_UA frozen lines + security guarantees <-> lifting sanctions (exc. frozen funds).

@Tatarigami_UA Only if Ukraine joins NATO. But under no circumstances should Russia's sovereignty over the occupied territories be recognized. Sanctions must never be lifted unless Russia pays reparations, returns the kidnapped children and POWs, and withdraws its forces from Ukraine.

@Tatarigami_UA I agree, but in Putin's head, if fight against Ukraine last enoughly long, Ukraine as it is now will eventually collapse. I think it's his only actual goal in his war. So in any "negociations", he will always demand something more than what the current situation offers.