I think Rubio has been doing a good job representing Trump in foreign affairs so far -- especially in S. America and WRT moving the illegal migrants out.
And maybe he's genuinely changed his priorities (for personal or even political reasons). The links are quite mixed when I ask "Is Rubio a neocon".
So, I might have picked a different politician, but his name was the one that came to mind. And I had recently read some of his latest comments on the war.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/trump-us-russia-ukraine-war-putin-ceasefire-britain-france-nato-marco-rubio/
" Russia has effectively rejected a U.S. proposal for a full and immediate 30-day halt in the fighting.
"Our judgment is that Putin continues to obfuscate, continues to drag his feet," British Foreign Secretary David Lammy told reporters at NATO headquarters, standing alongside his French counterpart Jean-Noel Barrot in a symbolic show of unity.
Rubio said Russia's real intentions in the negotiations would become clear within weeks.
"We will know from their answers very soon whether they are serious about proceeding with real peace or whether it's a delay tactic," Rubio told reporters in Brussels. "Now we've reached the stage where we need to make progress."
I get it, also, that coming up with reasons why Russia must make "concessions" sounds reasonable, and is likely in line with Trump's position.
But it is neither likely nor reasonable to expect Russia to make "concessions" over what it has already won, when it has overwhelming momentum on its side -- after being double crossed by Zelinsky and US years ago. (E.g., http://www.nprillinois.org/2024-05-06/the-story-behind-2022s-secret-ukraine-russia-peace-negotiations, but see also the Minsk agreement double cross.
Russia is being asked to give up its momentum and overwhelming advantage...for WHAT? A "30 day truce" it doesn't need? Ukraine needs that -- why doesn't Ukraine just make its concessions up front and see if Russia will agree to end the war?
I mean, the US demanded unequivocal SURRENDER from both Japan and Nazi Germany in WW2. We COULD have offered "a truce" (which would have benefitted both Japan and Nazi Germany enormously as a time to regroup. But we didn't. And we didn't because WE had overwhelming momentum on our side in those cases.
Russia has almost completed the complete capture of the whole ethnic-Russian areas of eastern Ukraine which it stated, clearly, it was most concerned about.
But there are other areas which are primarily Russian which it has scarcely begun to fight for: Odessa comes primarily to mind.
If this was goes on into summer, those other areas will be "liberated", too. And Odessa, in particular, is a geopolitical gem.
So, putting the US in Russia's shoes, why should Russia agree to GIVE UP ITS MOMENTUM for a 30-day "truce" -- which will benefit primarily Ukraine and European/American interests? Again, we know very well what the US would do if we had overwhelming momentum and, say, it was Canada or Mexico where the battle lines were.
Russia has nothing, or next to nothing, to gain by agreeing to a 30 day "time out so Ukraine can get better organzied to continue the war". And Zelinsky cannot be trusted to deal in good faith on anything...didn't he already give both Russia AND Trump ample evidence of that, already?
The terms are very simple if Ukraine doesn't want to lose EVERYTHING: Ukraine surrenders uneqivocally all the land it has already lost, and agrees to never seek EU nor NATO membership, ever. And agrees to restructure its government and oust Zelinsky's regime. And agrees to never "militarize" again. (who is it militarizing against?)
You may think I am not being reasonable that Russia doesn't make "concessions". But I'm just saying, the US wouldn't make "concessions" if the roles could be completely reversed.
In fact, it can be argued that Russia would be making a major concession to just agree to the above terms and to give up its overwhelming momentum at this very late state in the war. Another year and Russia will likely have both Odessa and Kiev. So, it is US, Europe and Ukraine which need to recognize the realities here.
Could there be other things introduced to induce Russia to be more generous than that? Yeah, but they are probably not Ukraine's to give: the US and Europe could probably agree to drop all sanctions against Russia in return for Russia being willing to commit to greater concessions. But I don't hear that being proposed.
| 