Stupid suggestion by someone who doesn’t understand what it means to lose your historical home.
soon to be “former” Nato official…
This is stupid. No one has suggested anything.
– It must be up to Ukraine to decide when and on what terms they want to negotiate.
and
– I’m not saying it has to be like this. But that could be a possible solution, replied Jenssen.
They were merely discussing theoreticals.
That NATO official is right.
NATO will never accept Ukraine if it has territory occupied by Russia, because NATO would then accept a nation in a state of war against Russia.
NATO will only accept Ukraine if they got their own shit sorted out. If Ukraine can’t take back all the lands they legally own and want to join NATO nonetheless, they’ll have to make a choice or forgo a NATO accession until that issue is resolved.
Can’t have your cake and eat it too. This is a huge over-reaction over something that has been already explained and told numerous times, Ukraine is free to do whatever they want in regards to this war, but they can’t force others (NATO) to accept what they want.
This is one of the few solutions that can work in the long run, but it all depends on several things
1. What does it mean “to give up the land”? Recognize that it’s Russian or promise to not try taking it back with force? First is unacceptable, second is possible.
2. What land? Russia shouldn’t be able to keep land corridor to Crimea after this war.
Mr. Jenssen, which parts of Norway would be okay to give away for you?
Didn’t Medvedev say this?
He’s just being factual. Whatever ends the war achieves the “being at peace” requirement for joining NATO, and could open a way to enter the coalition. It doesn’t say anything at all about how the war should be ended. And given the way he brought it up, it doesn’t seem like it’s just a personal opinion.
Sound pretty entitled to me
I am ok, if some NATO country would give up their land. Hungary, fo example. /s
Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons for empty promises, not gonna happen again.
11 comments
Stupid suggestion by someone who doesn’t understand what it means to lose your historical home.
soon to be “former” Nato official…
This is stupid. No one has suggested anything.
– It must be up to Ukraine to decide when and on what terms they want to negotiate.
and
– I’m not saying it has to be like this. But that could be a possible solution, replied Jenssen.
They were merely discussing theoreticals.
That NATO official is right.
NATO will never accept Ukraine if it has territory occupied by Russia, because NATO would then accept a nation in a state of war against Russia.
NATO will only accept Ukraine if they got their own shit sorted out. If Ukraine can’t take back all the lands they legally own and want to join NATO nonetheless, they’ll have to make a choice or forgo a NATO accession until that issue is resolved.
Can’t have your cake and eat it too. This is a huge over-reaction over something that has been already explained and told numerous times, Ukraine is free to do whatever they want in regards to this war, but they can’t force others (NATO) to accept what they want.
This is one of the few solutions that can work in the long run, but it all depends on several things
1. What does it mean “to give up the land”? Recognize that it’s Russian or promise to not try taking it back with force? First is unacceptable, second is possible.
2. What land? Russia shouldn’t be able to keep land corridor to Crimea after this war.
Mr. Jenssen, which parts of Norway would be okay to give away for you?
Didn’t Medvedev say this?
He’s just being factual. Whatever ends the war achieves the “being at peace” requirement for joining NATO, and could open a way to enter the coalition. It doesn’t say anything at all about how the war should be ended. And given the way he brought it up, it doesn’t seem like it’s just a personal opinion.
Sound pretty entitled to me
I am ok, if some NATO country would give up their land. Hungary, fo example. /s
Ukraine gave up nuclear weapons for empty promises, not gonna happen again.