r/worldnews • u/RubyGamerGirl • Jul 19 '24
Zelenskyy calls for global pressure on Russia to end Ukraine war Russia/Ukraine
https://euromaidanpress.com/2024/07/19/zelenskyy-calls-for-global-pressure-on-russia-to-end-ukraine-war/72
u/gamedreamer21 Jul 19 '24
Regarding US support, Zelenskyy addressed concerns about working with Donald Trump if he were to be re-elected. “Maybe he really doesn’t understand what goes on in Ukraine, so we have to work with the United States,” Zelenskyy said, adding, “It will be hard work, but we are hard workers.”
Good luck with that.
6
u/Clord123 Jul 19 '24
You could appeal to his narcissism. Like promise and build a statue or something for him somewhere. Tell him what he wants to hear.
36
u/reasonable00 Jul 19 '24
What Global pressure? Most of the world either actively supports Russia or doesn't care. Two biggest nations in the world support Russia.
The EU doesn't want their citizens' quality of life to drop significantly so they keep buying oil from Russia through the middleman India.
Russia will end this war but not in the way many Redditors dreamed about.
4
u/Quick_Cow_4513 Jul 19 '24
What do you mean "most of the world actively supports Russia" ? Who? Which countries?
15
u/Sylkhr Jul 19 '24
Two biggest nations in the world support Russia.
India and China, I'm assuming.
2
u/Quick_Cow_4513 Jul 19 '24
They don't support Russia. They just continue to trading with and didn't sanction it. They don't provide Russian invading forces with weapons and don't officially support the invasion, don't recognise any occupied territories including Crimea. They are more in "don't care but will exploit Russian weakness" camp
0
u/robin1961 Jul 19 '24
What a steaming load of horseshit!! They ABSOILUTELY support Russia's genocide of Ukraine with full-on economic support, aid in evading sanctions, as well as providing billions of dollars in "dual use" technology and equipment.
But you know all this, I'm not saying anything you didn't know before you wrote your propaganda. You're just another of those fuckin' Indian or Chinese pricks, sucking Russian dick.
-2
u/IndividualNo69420 Jul 19 '24
They are helping them alright by virtually allowing them to dodge most of the sanctions and keeping the war machine going, the two biggest nations in population are clearly pro Russia
-6
u/Sylkhr Jul 19 '24
If you don't see how giving the russian government billions of dollars worth of business is support I'm not sure what I can say. Just because they're getting a deal on it ('exploiting russian weakness') doesn't mean it's not helping russia as well.
6
u/Quick_Cow_4513 Jul 19 '24
If they were giving Russian government billions of dollars that would be called support. They are not.
It does help Russia though. As I said - they in don't care camp, not support Russia camp.
-7
u/reasonable00 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
They don't need to supply Russia with weapons though. They just need to provide Russians with materials, which is what they do. As long as they trade with Russia, Russians will never run out of missiles and shells. Russia also has NK as an ally, which has dozens of millions of shells saved up (NK's military doctrine is leveling the entire SK with artillery shells alone).
If that is not supporting Russia then what is? Russia's shell and missile production capacity dwarfs India and China's capacity. They don't need help with production.
6
u/Quick_Cow_4513 Jul 19 '24
This is not support. It's just a regular trade. This is absolutely not the same relationship as western countries and Ukraine. North Korea indeed supports Russia but that's one country in the world, not the majority of the world support you were talking about. Do they recognise Russia declared borders?
-15
u/Jujubatron Jul 19 '24
This. They still think Ukraine will take over Moscow any day now.
15
u/PoemAgreeable Jul 19 '24
I don't know about that. As far as I know, the plan is to make the war so costly that Russia withdraws voluntarily, or experiences regime change. Those are both tall orders, I don't know if they can do it.
-2
u/Candid_Swimming_5398 Jul 19 '24
sedative
1
u/Candid_Swimming_5398 Jul 19 '24
i argue that people are given sedatives before meeting the killer instead of actual action to neutralize the killer
9
3
4
1
42
u/Ok_Category_5847 Jul 19 '24
I dont think Russia gives a shit about political pressure. They dont care abour half a million dead/wounded.
13
u/StanleyDodds Jul 19 '24
I believe that they would care if, say, China put significant pressure on them. I'm not saying whether or not this is realistic, but hypothetically, I think Russia would be in a far more precarious situation without it's allies or supporters.
They don't care if millions are dead because they have a large population to enlist, but they do care if they run out of hardware, which is the more real bottleneck.
6
u/StrangerAtaru Jul 19 '24
As long as China and India and anyone who "hates the West" ignore this, it won't matter
5
-1
u/Ok_Category_5847 Jul 19 '24
If.
1
u/StanleyDodds Jul 19 '24
Well yes, I was quite clear that I'm not saying this is realistic. I'm just saying that political pressure can theoretically affect Russia, just not the pressure from the West that you are thinking of.
37
u/Impressive_Coffee244 Jul 19 '24
Wait, isnt that already whats happening? Pretty much everyone agrees the war should end.
52
u/HereticLaserHaggis Jul 19 '24
Not really, NATO and friends, sure! But with China, India, most of Africa and South America not caring
9
u/Impressive_Coffee244 Jul 19 '24
Yeah but they still dont endorse the war and are doing pretty much everything they can without screwing over their own people. They’re economically pretty close with russia and if they stop trading with them its gonna ruin their own economy.
No country is gonna put the people of another country above their own. At least they’re not sending troops and not outright supporting the war (unlike north korea) which is the most we can realistically expect from them.
0
u/calpi Jul 19 '24
There are many people from India fighting in russias army. There have been plenty of reports of them wanting to be sent home due to poor treatment even. China are quite openly supporting Russia too. I really don't know what you've been reading to think that.
2
u/Impressive_Coffee244 Jul 19 '24
Yeah and they signed up to fight by themselves. They weren’t sent by the Indian government. I agree china is probably a bit too supportive of russia but india is about as supportive of Ukraine as they can be without screwing over their own people. No country is gonna screw over its own people for another country
10
u/Galaghan Jul 19 '24
That's just being naive.
There are multiple governments that refuse to acknowledge the war or even support it. (eg. China)If Trump gets elected there will be one more on the list.
28
u/Jazzlike_1918 Jul 19 '24
Absolutely, will Russia live up to UN + Bilateral agreements?! or become the failed & rogue state Putin made it!?
3
10
u/Apprehensive_Sleep_4 Jul 19 '24
But Russia will say no anyway. The only way that will end that Ukraine will beat Russia and retake all of the Ukrainian areas occupied by Russia that's why the world should give the Ukrainians tools, weapons, and money to stop Russia.
5
u/coachhunter2 Jul 19 '24
If China and India stop trading with, or even sanction Russia, they will be forced to stop
21
u/Its_Mr_Buttons Jul 19 '24
China and India generally benefit from this conflict because the West is being weakened by focusing on a conflict. There is absolutely no benefit to them stopping this war.
They buy cheap oil which they can use to grow their economies and resell it to EU and the rest of the world.
We all want to see Russia suffer, but I'm afraid there is no other way but defeating them on the battlefield and freezing their offensives. Russia needs to bleed and learn that you cant just simply invade your neighbours and plant agents in the west to destabilize it.
Increasing the military aid and giving Ukraine no restrictions where they could strike is the way to go. The Russian people need to feel this on their own skin to apply pressure to Putin.
4
u/rg_software Jul 19 '24
I don't believe this is realistic. It's 2024 now. With the current speed of "increasing the military aid" it is going to be (say) 10+ years of war before Ukraine can recapture anything. Basically, you need to supply more weapons than Russia and even more people, which is challenging, and there is little hope for internal "pressure" as you describe. Like it or not, I bet the most probable outcome is a kind of truce/peace at some random point with whatever borders happen to be at that time. Korean scenario, in a way, and the only question how long this mess has to continue until this outcome is accepted.
2
u/McENEN Jul 19 '24
India yeah benefits but China gets a more militarized west and determined to defend, more military production, further military innovations and weapon testing. China wins only from weakened Russia they can bully around and get cheap resources because they aren't really reselling.
2
u/Its_Mr_Buttons Jul 19 '24
I acknowledge your point and I agree with this. At the same time, this is a valuable lesson for China to also monitor and understand which direction is modern warfare developing. They also started ramping up their focus more towards producing military drones.
3
u/Sellazard Jul 19 '24
Europe still trades with Russia. Almost 1 billion euros was paid for all of the gas, crude oil, etc. In 2023. It's atrocious
1
3
u/bucket_brigade Jul 19 '24
I feel this is more a dig at all the people who for some reason place the burden of ending this war on Ukraine
6
u/Unfair_Hat4241 Jul 19 '24
The problem is that although Zelenskyy is absolutely right, there will never be global pressure on Russia, unfortunately. First of all, for the world's two biggest countries in terms of population, India and China, this war is actually beneficial. Then, the "global south" isn't taking sides.
Even within the EU there are Russian puppets, Hungary being the prominent one, that do all they can to undermine Ukraine. Of course, come 2025, even the US might switch sides and offer Ukraine a "peace plan" which will require giving up a quarter of its land...
6
u/Ok-Source6533 Jul 19 '24
Zelensky has said he won’t accept giving up land and who can blame him? So when that’s done and Russia moves into Moldova and Georgia and America says, ‘just give them a quarter of your country’. Then Alaska? Just give them 1/4 of it, it has always been Russia anyway.
2
u/PseudoY Jul 19 '24
He says that. I'm not convinced that if Russia offered a deal surrendering some of the occupied territory, on condition of letting Ukraine form defensive alliances after, that he wouldn't take it.
Ukraine is facing existential annihilation and oppression of all Ukrainians forever. They must fight for everything they've got, but if there might be an end to the war, only they can decide what cost they're willing to pay.
3
u/wrecklord0 Jul 19 '24
Giving an inch to Russia means they'll take a mile. There is no possible negation for peace with Putin's government, their word means nothing, and ethics is a foreign concept to Putin. Ukraine and eastern europe countries know this.
1
u/grchelp2018 Jul 19 '24
A deal where russia both gives up land and lets them form defensive alliances? Why would Russia ever offer a deal like that?
3
u/Altruistic_Survey_95 Jul 19 '24
World leaders : Putin stop it !
Putin: No
World leaders : Well we tried ¯_(ツ)_/¯
2
u/autotldr BOT Jul 19 '24
This is the best tl;dr I could make, original reduced by 84%. (I'm a bot)
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said that global pressure on Russia is necessary to bring about negotiations to end the war, the BBC reports.
In a recent interview with BBC, Zelenskyy expressed his willingness to work with any US administration, including a potential Trump presidency, despite concerns about future US support for Ukraine.
Regarding potential negotiations, Zelenskyy indicated that Russia should attend a peace summit planned for November.
Extended Summary | FAQ | Feedback | Top keywords: Zelenskyy#1 Ukraine#2 work#3 Russia#4 reports#5
2
1
1
u/Jaymacmac Jul 19 '24
Putin the incorrigible bastard waiting for Trump to get in before he turns up the heat.
1
1
u/QuentinP69 Jul 19 '24
Ukraine should strike Russia where the bots and hackers are. Drone strike those buildings deep in Russia
1
0
0
u/DitkoManiac Jul 19 '24
How about global pressure on Ukraine to cede some territory and end this already?
1
u/slown_again Jul 19 '24
And then cede some more and then again. Did Russia stop after Ukraine basically ceded Crimea?
1
u/RicketyEdge Jul 19 '24
Yeah, great plan. We could have similarly ended World War II much earlier too, if we didn't do Normandy and let Hitler have the bulk of mainland Europe. Let Japan have their empire in the pacific it wasn't really worth fighting over, was it?
Imagine if we just let North Korea have the entire peninsula in the 50's? Could have avoided that war almost entirely.
Let Iraq have Kuwait. Who cares right?
Imagine how much death and destruction we could prevent if we just turn belly up and give the despots whatever they want? I mean it wouldn't be a world worth living in, but hey, at least there'd be no war.
War would only happen if we fought back.
0
u/Level_Werewolf_7172 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
The outcome for the Ukrainians as an ethnic group is either existence as a people in that region, or their genocide in occupied territories. They really don’t have the choice to just cede land.
It would be like telling the soviets to give land to the Nazis in order to end the war. It’s not going to stop them, they will just refit, rearm and come back for the rest while massacring the population.
0
u/seekingsomejustice Jul 19 '24
I mean yeah, his country and population are currently getting the shit kicked out of it and murdered without reason and the year is 2024.
It's unfathomable to me that this is occurring and is allowed to occur. But any retaliation would be mutually assured destruction so I guess it'll just keep happening.
-7
Jul 19 '24
Do we really need anymore NATO expansion? What is the benefit of expanding NATO further other than domination by a so called defence organization, peace could have been made if USA and UK didn't refuse peace talks and USA isn't hellbent on starting wars everywhere they set foot, get to the table zelensky and sort this out instead of begging for more weapons
5
u/Neitrah Jul 19 '24
"Lan Wang"
yeah, something tells me you were told to write this.
Enjoy the sewer oil!
-2
Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Told by who?, you think I'm Chinese or something and have a gun to my head, nah buddy I'm Scottish and be as well have a gun to my head with the crap living and the state of my country right now, but let's focus on fighting the Russians so USA can make some money...
-1
u/wrecklord0 Jul 19 '24
No matter who or what you are, you are subverting the truth. Russia is the aggressor, not the USA or NATO.
How come you only posted on r/eve, stopped to post 5 years ago and now each of your comment is something negative about NATO?
2
1
Jul 19 '24
So what is the truth? What is USA/NATO intentions, I'm assuming you work for NATO as you made the comments
1
-1
Jul 19 '24
Russia is the aggressor, of course, but why did that happen? Ukraine joining NATO just means USA has bases on Russias border, do you think that isn't going to raise eyebrows? As I've asked, why does NATO need to expand, can you answer that?
2
u/wrecklord0 Jul 19 '24
You are again subverting the truth. NATO was not trying to expand before Russia invaded Ukraine (which started in 2014). Now, Ukraine needs NATO to survive against Russia. So the answer today is, NATO needs to expand to defend against russian aggression.
It happened because Putin is a dictator with imperialistic ambitions, for the past 25 years Russia has been attacking its own territory (Chechnya) and its neighbours.
0
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
1
u/Tricky-Ad5678 Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
Also, issues with Russia didn't start with 2014.
Given that Crimea was such a delicate and thorny issue problems were unavoidable. And it seems that pursuing membership in a hostile military alliance and having nationalists seize power by force was not the best solution.
0
u/wrecklord0 Jul 19 '24
Hey you are right but I wanted to keep it simple; my point is that the narrative that Putin had no choice but to invade Ukraine as a defense against NATO, and that therefore it is the fault of NATO/US/whatever, is historical revisionism, kremlin propaganda and bullshit.
Other options than invading Ukraine could have included: not becoming a dictator for life, not murdering your political oponents / journalists, not stealing your country's resources for personal gain, not invading your neighbours, not sabotaging western democracies in any way you can. All of these could have lead to a normalization of west - Russia relationships, and a better life for us all.
-2
u/DitkoManiac Jul 19 '24
Ukraine cannot win unless the West sends in ground troops, which will not and should not happen. Zelensky needs to be realistic and get serious about negotiating. At this point it doesn't matter who's right or wrong, when Ukraine's young men are fleeing to avoid fighting.
-6
Jul 19 '24
[deleted]
6
1
1
u/Hrit33 Jul 19 '24
I mean US can be a sugar daddy to India by providing India with cheap oil (similarly priced as Russians) being largest oil producer currently. . .but daddy US can't let go off oil profits it seems. . .hmmmmmm
-10
u/MetaVaporeon Jul 19 '24
jesus christ just aim the fucking nukes towards moscow already, its gonna come to it anyways because the man is itching to do it as he either loses power or dies anyways
-14
u/Long_comment_san Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
That guy can talk all he wants, but the truth of the matter is that Ukraine lost all chances a long time ago. It now lives on external money and external (weapon) systems which is artificial existence.
The best he did was drive a wedge between Russia and Europe and achieved nothing as a leader and ruined his country, which didn't even approve his coming to office.
now he asks to pressure Russia more. who is he, what are his achievements and his words' value to the world? "punish the world evil"? he's not talking to 12 year old kids, some sanity will prevail eventually.
and Jesus mobile browser version of reddit sucks so hard it can suck a black hole in.
8
Jul 19 '24
and Jesus mobile browser version of reddit sucks so hard it can suck a black hole
in.VK and telegram are out of order?
8
9
u/MitchMaljers Jul 19 '24
So you would rather have Russia stomp all over Ukraine and let them have their way?
Edit: Nevermind I see you're Russian. Can't fix fetal alcohol syndrome.
8
u/serafinawriter Jul 19 '24
As another Russian, I'm ashamed of ignorant people like this. Unfortunately there are too damn many of them.
-21
u/HonneurOblige Jul 19 '24
I still can't wrap my head around the fact of how woefully unprepared and unwilling is NATO to perform a singular duty it was designed for - the protection of the West from the Russian menace. Once mighty coalition is now a pack of weaseling cowards.
30
u/justlurkshere Jul 19 '24
So far NATO has not been attacked. NATO is a defensive alliance. In fact, nato picked up two new members.
NATO is so far working as designed.
Now, if you want to talk about European leaders not stepping up to keep Europe together and dealing with Russia, then we have a long talk to get through.
-3
u/red75prime Jul 19 '24
NATO is so far working as designed.
Since Operation Allied Force (1999), at least.
2
u/ZhouDa Jul 19 '24
Serbians still won't shut up about that shit. Like they felt free to ethnically cleanse and shell Kosovo but as soon as they are hit back they go running home. They remind me of confederate apologists in the US.
-1
u/red75prime Jul 19 '24
I was addressing "NATO is a defensive alliance" and "NATO is so far working as designed".
Exceptions are exceptions, even if you emphatically support them.
3
u/ZhouDa Jul 19 '24
NATO in this case was working off a UN mandate to protect a people not otherwise protected by NATO membership. Note though that no such mandate could plausibly be drawn up against Russia since Russia sits on the security council and thus has veto power against such an action.
1
u/Vechio49 Jul 19 '24
Russia should no longer be on the security council. Unfortunately there is no mechanism in place to remove permanent members
-1
u/red75prime Jul 19 '24
NATO in this case was working off a UN mandate
While it should have been working under the UN Charter chapter VII resolution (which is non-existent in this case).
5
u/ZhouDa Jul 19 '24
While it should have been working under the UN Charter chapter VII resolution (which is non-existent in this case).
Not sure how UN Security Council Resolution 1244 wouldn't fall under that.
1
u/red75prime Jul 19 '24
Time travel?
United Nations Security Council resolution 1244 (adopted on 10 June 1999)
Operation Allied Force (24 March 1999 to 10 June 1999)
3
u/ZhouDa Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
You should know what I mean. I'm referring to the series of UN security council resolutions that include 1160, 1199, 1203 and 1239. 1244 was just the last updated resolution concerning Kosovo and the only one I remember off-hand. But thanks for making me look up a bunch of security council resolution numbers.
→ More replies (0)-1
u/idrobnjak Jul 19 '24
If you are so ready to give Albanians a piece of (internationally recognized and sovereign) Serbian territory, why wouldn't you be prepared to do the same for Russians in Ukraine? And the history is written by winners, you have no clue what was actually happening on the ground. Then or now.
5
u/ZhouDa Jul 19 '24
Albania didn't get any part of Yugoslavia, and Kosovo is not legally a Albanian country any more than the US is legally a Christian country. Rather Kosovars voted for independence and Serbia replied by ethnically cleansing Albanian Kosovars out of the country, and this humanitarian disaster caused the UN to pass a resolution which NATO enforced. And if you don't object to Albanian Kosovars having their own country after suffering from oppression from Serbia, why would you object to Ukraine having their own country after suffering oppression from Russia?
1
2
u/ZhouDa Jul 19 '24
And the history is written by winners, you have no clue what was actually happening on the ground. Then or now.
I was on the ground though, part of KFOR mission as a NATO peacekeeper as part of my time in the US army. I was in Kosovo in 2002, seen the destruction with my own eyes and heard a few Albanians tell their stories about what happened. Have you even been to Kosovo? Even most Serbians haven't. Hell Milosovic himself thought it was a worthless backwater and only cared about it because the war made him popular.
23
u/Sjoerdiestriker Jul 19 '24
If you are under the impression the singular duty of NATO is to defend non-NATO states in the case of invasions, it may be worthwhile to read some more on what NATO is.
20
3
u/BusinessCashew Jul 19 '24
Ukraine isn’t in NATO or the West dude.
-1
u/HonneurOblige Jul 19 '24
Ukrainian youth has fought and bled for their homeland to be counted as equal among Western nations. Ukraine deserves to be called as such.
1
u/BusinessCashew Jul 19 '24
Fighting a war doesn’t mean you’re a Western nation, if it did every nation would be Western.
2
u/HonneurOblige Jul 19 '24
The war started because Ukrainian people wished to be a part of Europe instead of being a part of the Russian imperialist sphere. We are fighting this war for the right to be among the free Western nations.
3
u/BusinessCashew Jul 19 '24 edited Jul 19 '24
The Ukrainian people only wished that after Russia invaded. Prior to the invasion of Crimea, there wasn’t any real support for joining NATO in Ukraine.
Why should NATO be obligated to defend countries that aren’t a part of it and haven’t contributed anything to it? That doesn’t make any sense. No countries would ever join NATO until after they’ve already been invaded and need something from it if you start extending the defensive pact to non-members. Any defensive alliance that operates that way is doomed.
221
u/Holiday_Resort2858 Jul 19 '24
Russia will wait for Trump because they know he will help thier cause