52% of Germans say Ukraine should cede Russian-occupied territories for peace, poll shows

19 comments

1. If the alternative is losing another million men and more territory then it seems to me that 52% of Germans are just using logic instead of emotion to think

   It’s just sad we seem to be going into a might is right period, and no one is checking it. Israel in Palestine, Russia in Ukraine etc. nationalism and imperialism really need to be pushed back…again

2. This would work if it was only gonna be this time. 5-10 years from now it’ll be another territory.. then another.. then another… Russia will just keep taking because they can

3. >[**Ukraine**](https://kyivindependent.com/tag/ukraine/) **should be prepared to cede** [**occupied territories**](https://kyivindependent.com/tag/occupied-ukrainian-territories/) **to Russia if necessary to facilitate a peace agreement**

   This is the statement they agreed with. I dont see anything controversial in this. Ukraine does need to accept that they cant get all the occupied territories back right now. But it should ofcourse only be if there are real and reliable guarantees to make sure Russia doesnt just resume the war after re-arming.

   Note: I dont think very many of the respondents realize what that word “cede” means here, and propably answered from the perspective that Ukraine would have to accept that Russia keeps occupying those areas for now. Actually ceding them would be something entirely different and I am not convinced everyone who replied is a aware of that.

4. You can say a fuckton of shit about Winston Churchill, but he knew one thing for sure; you cannot reason with a tiger when your head is in its mouth.

   He knew Hitler couldn’t be reasoned with through peace talks, negotiations or deference; be it through diplomacy or literal land. You had to show force. By giving Putin what he wants, he would only want more.

5. This isn’t the offer on the table though. Ukraine have been willing to accept this for quite a few months now. But Russia want a lot more territory that Ukraine still holds, mainly their key defensive belt in the Donbas that if handed over would make them far more vulnerable if/when Russia come back for yet another bite of the cherry

6. >The position was most present among supporters of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) party, with 72% expressing this view. Currently the strongest opposition party in the German parliament, the AfD has consistently criticized Germany’s support for Ukraine.

   >Support for the position was lower among voters of the governing coalition, with 43% of CDU/CSU supporters and 48% of Social Democratic Party (SPD) voters in favor.

7. Maybe they should give them some of Germany instead, Just hand over Mecklenburg. Oh, is that too personal for them? That’s how Ukraine feels. Its easy for people to advise giving up territory when it isn’t theirs.

8. NATO has to make a real choice here.

   Either fully arm and support Ukraine with the freedom to use that support as they see fit or openly negotiate with Russia over territorial concessions. This halfway approach is only leading to more Ukrainian deaths and more land lost over time.

   At this point, it really is a do-or-die situation and pretending otherwise just prolongs the suffering

9. Ukraine does not have a pathway to victory. Period. Full stop. They don’t have the man power, the don’t have the weaponry, and their entire military budget and supply is dependent upon other nations.

   Russia has won this war. Ukraine can decide if they want to lose more land and lose a greater percentage of their working population or if they want to try and have some sort of amicable relationship with the superpower next door.

10. It’s a harsh reality and I am personally divided on this. The way the war is going, there isn’t going to be a clear winner anytime soon. The current positions in terms of territory etc. have been entrenched for such a long time, there just isn’t much movement in either direction.

    So essentially the choices are: continue as is, with more victims and no progress. Or find some sort of peace agreement. With the way the war is going, I think Russia has more stamina. Their population isn’t constantly confronted with the realities of war, it’s Ukrainians who are understandably war-weary.

    But accepting these terms makes me think: how can we ensure that we don’t get another new war 10 years down the line like last time? Obviously we have to look at countries like Germany that helped prop up the Russian economy big time. I don’t think we’d have seen the current conflict without Germany cozying up to Russian gas, for example.

    So peace… but how to make it actually last?

11. For what peace ? Established how ? The U.S. doesn’t want to go there, Russia is vetoing any EU troops and Ukraine doesn’t want the Chinese anywhere.

12. What if germany offered some land to Russia instead? That would probably be acceptable.

    How about it?

13. Sure, land for peace.

    But its not land for peace, its land for the possibility of a ceasefire.

    Its more accurately, demilatarise, give up more land, let us decide when, where and how your government operates and let go of any semblance of ukrainian identity and independence…for peace.

    AKA capitulate.

14. Actual peace as in a nonaggression pact that Russia agrees to as well as NATO membership for Ukraine or is it just a ceasefire(pause) peace.

    Big difference

15. Sure, just give Putin a present. He will not do it again. BIG PROMISE! The Baltic countries are absolutely safe, believe me!

16. The only real solution for Ukraine is to get nuclear weapons and that will end the war, and all further Russian advancements. Its Ukraine giving them up with caused this.

    If I was Ukraine that would be my goal after not dying of course.

17. Just a reminder that the Minsk agreement didn’t require Ukraine to cede any land at all, just a cessation of hostilities and recognition of Donetsk and Luhansk people’s rights, in accordance to Ukrainian’s own constitution.

    Istanbul agreements demanded Crimea, neutrality, and no NATO explicitly.

    Current agreements require all the land that Russia currently occupies, and then some.

    How much longer before Russia’s conditions become effectively worse then what all the proponents of “if we appease Russia now, they’re just (maybe) going to come back later” are advocating for?

18. That number would be much higher if those people had to actually get forcibly drafted to fight to their deaths to defend land. Russia sucks. But Putin is a dictator and he is willing to throw millions of Russian lives away to save face. So in order for the war to end realistically the only option unless NATO or the European Union wants to put boots on the ground is for Ukraine to give up some of the territory that Russia already controls basically. Honestly even if Ukraine did give up a little bit of land that Russia already controls then Russia still basically lost. If you count how much money they’ve spent on the war and how many lives have been lost in the end there won’t be really any winners.

19. This is the key issue when a democracy is in (Proxy) war with another power during an economic downturn. People are going to start asking why they’re giving away support when they themselves are suffering.

Comments are closed.