The Netherlands discussed today what they could do. The answer was send 470 troops to guard the potential new border. Poland refused to put any troops in Ukraine (arguably for a good reason since they border Belarus). The US doesn't include Europe for a reason at it's peace talks. We might disagree with it, but we are weak defensively.

Most countries in the world still happily trade with Russia. Nowadays Northern Africa, India, Iran and China are happy to do business with Russia or even help them militarily.

Japan, Canada and South Korea might not be too happy about Russia, but also keep awfully quiet. Europe is military might is big on paper. However Europe severely lacks stockpiles of ammunition to keep there armies going and more important the will to keep it's army going and Europe in general is not good at making painful choices.

US President Demands Higher Share of Ukrainian GDP than Germany’s First World War reparations

Donald Trump's demand for a $500bn (£400bn) "payback" from Ukraine goes far beyond US control over the country's critical minerals. It covers everything from ports and infrastructure to oil and gas, and the larger resource base of the country.

The terms of the contract that landed at Volodymyr Zelensky's office a week ago amount to the US economic colonisation of Ukraine, in legal perpetuity. It implies a burden of reparations that cannot possibly be achieved. The document has caused consternation and panic in Kyiv.

The Telegraph has obtained a draft of the pre-decisional contract, marked "Privileged & Confidential' and dated Feb 7 2025. It states that the US and Ukraine should form a joint investment fund to ensure that "hostile parties to the conflict do not benefit from the reconstruction of Ukraine".

The agreement covers the "economic value associated with resources of Ukraine", including "mineral resources, oil and gas resources, ports, other infrastructure (as agreed)", leaving it unclear what else might be encompassed. "This agreement shall be governed by New York law, without regard to conflict of laws principles," it states.

The US will take 50pc of recurring revenues received by Ukraine from extraction of resources, and 50pc of the financial value of "all new licences issued to third parties" for the future monetisation of resources. There will be "a lien on such revenues" in favour of the US. "That clause means 'pay us first, and then feed your children'," said one source close to the negotiations.

It states that "for all future licences, the US will have a right of first refusal for the purchase of exportable minerals". Washington will have sovereign immunity and acquire near total control over most of Ukraine's commodity and resource economy. The fund "shall have the exclusive right to establish the method, selection criteria, terms, and conditions" of all future licences and projects. And so forth, in this vein. It seems to have been written by private lawyers, not the US departments of state or commerce.

President Zelensky himself proposed the idea of giving the US a direct stake in Ukraine's rare earth elements and critical minerals on a visit to Trump Tower in September, hoping to smooth the way for continued arms deliveries.

He calculated that it would lead to US companies setting operations on the ground, creating a political tripwire that would deter Vladimir Putin from attacking again.

Some mineral basins are near the front line in eastern Ukraine, or in Russian-occupied areas. He has played up the dangers of letting strategic reserves of titanium, tungsten, uranium, graphite and rare earths fall into Russian hands. "If we are talking about a deal, then let's do a deal, we are only for it," he said.

He probably did not expect to be confronted with terms normally imposed on aggressor states defeated in war. They are worse than the financial penalties imposed on Germany and Japan after their defeat in 1945. Both countries were ultimately net recipients of funds from the victorious allies.

If this draft were accepted, Trump's demands would amount to a higher share of Ukrainian GDP than reparations imposed on Germany at the Versailles Treaty, later whittled down at the London Conference in 1921, and by the Dawes Plan in 1924. At the same time, he seems willing to let Russia off the hook entirely.

Donald Trump told Fox News that Ukraine had "essentially agreed" to hand over $500bn. "They have tremendously valuable land in terms of rare earths, in terms of oil and gas, in terms of other things," he said.

He warned that Ukraine would be handed to Putin on a plate if it rejected the terms. "They may make a deal. They may not make a deal. They may be Russian someday, or they may not be Russian someday. But I want this money back," he said.

Trump said the US had spent $300bn on the war so far, adding that it would be "stupid" to hand over any more. In fact the five packages agreed by Congress total $175bn, of which $70bn was spent in the US on weapons production. Some of it is in the form of humanitarian grants, but much of it is lend-lease money that must be repaid.

Revealed: Trump's confidential plan to put Ukraine in a stranglehold

JFC I hope Trump dies soon.

America wonders why so many countries hate it, why it has terrorism problems. This sort of deal is exactly the sort of deal which would make Ukrainians fucking despise America. Put your foot on their neck after they've just been through a devastating war, see how that works out for you. We're going to kick Ukraine into extreme nationalism with this sort of shit deal.

Yes, Iran the terrorist led country helps Russia, Lol. China I already mentioned, I'm aware of some South American, African and Asian countries trading with Russia, I'm aware of Russia's influence over Africa. Still, the majority of the world disagrees with Russia's actions so I'm not sure where you're getting it from that it's a small portion of Europe only. Some countries trade because Russia is their biggest trade partner, I don't believe it necessarily means they agree with Russia, they're just too cowardly to cut Russia off.

South Korea, Japan and Canada haven't been quiet at all? Japan is Ukraine's 4th largest supporter in terms of pure $ value and Canada is 5th. Japan in particular has talked a lot of shit about Russia because they hate Russia due to the Kuril Islands dispute. South Korea hasn't been quiet vocally but less supportive militarily but they do border with a country which wants to see them destroyed.

I could also say that Russia's army on paper was the 2nd most powerful in the world but look at how that turned out, they couldn't beat a country whose army on paper was in the high 20s. I think it's arguable if Europe has the political will to fight Russia and that's the scary part, but I do believe it is insane to argue that Europe couldn't beat Russia if it came down to it (if we remove nukes). Russia can't even take 20% of Ukraine without resorting to mopeds, donkeys, etc. What makes you think they could take on Poland, Baltics, Nordics, UK, France, Germany, Türkiye, Italy, etc? Lol.

Ukraine has a huge land-army and so does Russia, I think your mistake is thinking that NATO would get involved in an artillery slog battle, if Russia achieved air superiority which they tried to do countless of times then the war would have been lost, but Russia failed to do so, NATO isn't designed anymore to fight WW1-like battles, they will largely fight via the skies and seas before sending in the troops, this is where we have the huge superiority. If Europe had balls, Russia would have been pushed out of Ukraine already.

The Baltic Sea is a NATO Sea now, the Black Sea is controlled by Türkiye, Russia wouldn't be able to reach even Poland before European planes were flying overhead and turning Russians to paste. The argument will however, come back to, if we have the stomach for it, that is where I see the debate, WW3 isn't something anyone wants and even though I do believe Europe would win, it would come at large cost, Russia still has plenty of missiles that could do a lot of damage to us.

But Europe has made the hard choices in the past, more than America, such as WW1 and WW2. America dragged their feet to get involved in WW2 and only did so when they were practically forced into it by Japan, otherwise they likely never would have made the painful choice to get involved. But now Europe has felt peace for so long, I think many European leaders are too used to it and can't imagine it changing. It's a question of political will, not a question of actual capability, and you also ignore the fact that Europe would also enter a war economy mode with a population far greater than Russia and economy far greater than Russia. 

There's a myth that Russia is unbeatable too, when they lost in Afghanistan and Chechnya (1st time around) in recent history, they also couldn't keep Assad in power when he was their poster boy of propped up foreign leaders but Ukraine has stretched Russia too thin now.

Europe needs the political will to do what is right and Russia would be defeated.

Here is a map shared by Russian pro-war bloggers - “the way we see the end of Putin - Trump talks”
Naturally it’s not yet official position but certainly within the scope of Kremlin wish list

[image or embed]

— Anton Barbashin (@abarbashin.bsky.social) 16 February 2025 at 14:11

🇫🇷🇺🇦🇪🇺 A summit on Ukraine and European security issues has begun in Paris.

[image or embed]

— MAKS 24 👀🇺🇦 (@maks23.bsky.social) 17 February 2025 at 15:56

Ukraine will not accept a Saudi-talks peace deal, says Zelenskyy | Volodymyr Zelenskyy | The Guardian

If Vance hoped to persuade his audience, rather than simply insult it, he failed. Indeed, his speech backfired spectacularly, convincing many listeners that America itself is now a threat to Europe. In the throng outside the conference hall, a prominent German politician told me: “That was a direct assault on European democracy.” A senior diplomat said: “It’s very clear now, Europe is alone.” When I asked him if he now regarded the US as an adversary, he replied: “Yes.”

Vance’s real warning to Europe

NATO is a relic now, America has destroyed it, we need something new, I'm not saying to leave NATO or boot America out, but there needs to be a backup alliance at this stage, a coalition of the willing, I don't know what to call it, NATO is compromised with Trump in it though and I don't trust Tulsi Gabbard as far as I can throw her.

I'm not sure it should be part of the EU either, as the EU is too procedural and bureaucratic, it can't be led effectively when there's bad faith actors like Orban and Fico, everything having to be unanimous will slow things down massively, then there's also the issue that the UK isn't in the EU and anyone else willing to fight for democracy (such as Canada) aren't even in Europe, Lol.

UK, France should extend their nuclear umbrella across other countries. Poland should acquire nukes of their own. Poland, The Baltics and The Nordics should each get a significant voice at the table, equal to that of UK, France, Germany, etc. Italy and Germany of course involved too and anyone else that wants to but I'm just listing the core.

I'm in full support of a European army, I'm just not sure if it should be a European Army outside of the EU or an EU Army. I don't know if UK would even get involved in an EU army considering Labour wets the bed at the sheer mention of EU. Tbh I'm not sure what the pros and cons would be if it was part of the EU or if it was something entirely new aside from the fact that, I don't want Hungary involved in it, Lmao.

It's sort of disgusting though that we even have to be dealing with these things in the first place.  Russia and Europe could all have a nicer place if they could mutually have some sort of agreeable peace between them, in order to avoid having to waste $$$$$ on a sizeable military.  Lives, money, and charity are all lost to the ages for a series of battles with no end in sight.  

I think it's the first case in human history where a nation fighting for its survival against a major aggressor is being forced—by a non-combatant partner—into paying Versailles-style reparations over military aid that had earlier been provided purposefully at no cost.

— Illia Ponomarenko (@ioponomarenko.bsky.social) 17 February 2025 at 21:10

Russia isn't collapsing anytime soon unless some of the Republics within Russia want out and force the country into a civil war, but the sharp decline is undeniable. Their losses will take decades to rebuild, and that's just on the military hardware front. They are sending their next generation to bleed out all while they already had a very low birth rate, essentially meaning that Russians are slowly dying out on the long run. Their economy is a mess, they can't keep war economy up for much longer yet also have committed to it so much that there ain't much of alternative left anymore. Putin rose the country from the ashes of the Soviet Union, and is returning it to the ashes step by step as we're speaking. Even if they were to achieve a complete victory in Ukraine, it would be a Phyrric one at best, as Russia is slowly getting on it's knees and will never get up from there anymore without major support from a stronger entity.

Ukraine's economy is similarly in the gutter, but they have one big advantage: Support from other countries, both for keeping them in the fight now and for reconstruction after the weapons fall silent means they keep their fighting force intact and their economy afloat, something Russia simply can't do. Russia lost the war, if they win on the battlefield or not.