this post was submitted on 02 Sep 2025
90 points (96.9% liked)
World News
37488 readers
331 users here now
News from around the world!
Rules:
-
Please only post links to actual news sources, no tabloid sites, etc
-
No NSFW content
-
No hate speech, bigotry, propaganda, etc
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
So if I read that right Britain is blamed for Ukraine not signing the deal because they said they’d still keep on supporting Ukraine if they continue the war? Seems like the influence of Britain is very much overstated here. You sent a link to an article that has a single other article as its source. From that source article I bring you this:
As far as I can find the list of Russia’s demands were far from reasonable at the time. Here are a few of them:
Meanwhile Russia made no concessions regarding giving back any of the land they were illegally occupying. Given the above I understand why the deal wasn’t signed at the time. I suspect all that signing that would have done is lead to a revolution in Ukraine to topple the government that signed away their county. I don’t think signing that would have avoided further bloodshed.
The West sinking the peace agreement is widely known. This has been confirmed by both Israeli and Turkish mediators. Also, the Ukrainians themselves confirm that neutrality was the main point and that anything else was merely "cosmetic".
Sabotage of the Istanbul Peace Agreement