On point 14 about frozen assets, Lawrence asks: “What is with the US making a profit from this?“ It’s simple, in every engagement there has to be something for Trump.
Until Trump (or perhaps Rubio...nah Trump) comments that he supports the plan it amounts to very little. What I can say is that it demands the Ukrainians put a lot of trust in Trump and the russians. History has shown neither of them are trustworthy in any shape or form.
Trump and Witkoff, as a pair of property developers with mob connections just think they are doing deals over bits of property and land, aiming for opportunities and money in it for themselves, both in Gaza and Ukraine.
That there are people and states involved, that will be violently sacrificed to other mobsters is of no concern to them whatsoever.
And they would do the same to any supposed 'allies'.
There are at the least two fatal and dangerous flaws in this set of provisions. #1, it recognizes the right of countries to invade each other, seize territory and keep it. This violates the UN Charter and sets a dangerous precedent all over the world. #2, there are no reparations outside some partial use of frozen assets for all the destruction and other war crimes Russia has committed in Ukrainian territory. Other flaws: #3 is what it gives the USA for doing what? Why should the USA have any control over or profit from Ukraine's business going forward beyond what Ukraine has already agreed to pay the USA for support it is purchasing. And finally #4, should the guarantors of any peace treaty not be the EU or NATO?
This is a carbon copy of what happened at Munich during which the British and French agreed to allow Hitler to absorb the Sudaton lands of Czechoslovakia into Germany. These were the defendable borders of Czechoslovakia and once taken by Germany, Czechoslovakia was defenceless. Hitler invaded within six months and took Czechoslovakia into German control. This resulted in Czechoslovakia having the lowest casualties during WW2. The British went home and doubled defence spending within a year, resulting in having sufficient planes to win the Battle of Britain, being prepared for the evacuation of Dunkirk, and able to equip the army in Egypt that resulted in what Churchill called “the end of the beginning “ at Tobruk. After the war all the Germans were forcibly removed from the restored Sudaton lands.
Cannot help to express 100% agreement with the connotations to this daft agreement. And where is Brussels as far as their view on the subject is concerned? Too busy shedding tears and wringing hands again? It makes me angry being an EU citizen, to be honest.
Orbán, Kaczyński, Erdoğan, Fico... Ursula von der Leyen and her word salad chefs, even if detained in Buchenwald, would have given the SS the benefit of doubt: "Oh, but maybe these windowless barracks really are showers?".
Assuming that these 28 points represent something “agreed” between Witkoff and Dmitriev (and thus with the approval of their masters Trump and Putin) it demonstrates that the USA cannot be considered an ally of western countries and democracy, it is willing to accept and condone naked military aggression and war crimes.
The US mediating between Russia and NATO demonstrates that the US no longer sees itself as a guarantor of Article 5 commitments or even part of NATO (shown also in its silence over threats and attacks on NATO countries that led to Article 4 discussions) . As said by John Woods below, this is akin to Munich. Guarantees in the Budapest memorandum from the US are shown as worthless. Perhaps to consider other US promises similarly.
Let us judge these words by Trump’s actions and words towards Putin and Russia. Trump has spoken often that Russia should be readmitted to the G8, so no surprise that this is one of the 28 points. Maybe Trump sees Ukraine getting a reasonable settlement from these points “after invading their larger neighbour”.
Trump and his cronies should not be permitted to impose their agreements without the presence or agreement of parties concerned, EU, Europe and of course Ukraine (Trump of course showed this method of negotiating with the Taliban and that ended well.)
It could be that Witkoff, Trump and others are merely just ignorant of history and the meaning of Latin terms, after all there is a great opportunity for USD 100 billion profit to go to each and their friends, along with the rare earth materials to be plundered from Ukraine. There is such ignorance in these proposals that there can be assumption that there are to gain headlines for Trump to claim another war solved towards his Noble Prize and give him and his acolytes an excuse to abandon Ukraine.
Maybe Trump is enacting revenge as Zelenskyy refused Trump’s corrupt offer of arms for material against Biden, and remember the Oval Office ambush. Europe and UK in particular need to show courage, and stand up to Trump, despite the costs. Trump has never imposed meaningful sanctions against Russia and objected to action he was forced to take following the Salisbury poisonings. Let’s just say what we see, Trump is Putin’s asset and a Russian ally. Intelligence sharing should follow this assumption too.
But where is concrete UK action, rearmament is still only a PowerPoint presentation and the UK remains committed to purchasing expensive military equipment from a dubious and capricious source.
I am sorry if this comes across as a rant, but I am so angry with Trump (and more so his “Von Papens” in Congress and press) and their actions. Yet, while hugging Zelenskyy, the UK prime minister “likes and respects” Trump, was willing to support negotiations when Trump suggested earlier this year, to risking fishing without a permit to the chief Oval Office bully, so maybe that explains the silence from Downing Street.
Naive question: couldn’t one add that every Russian provocation (airspace violations, drones, laser pointers, undersea cables) would automatically lead to an extension of the sanctions by 12 months (free-riders to Russia’s disadvantage)?
Thank you for your insightful annotations. It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on how Europe can/should position itself in response to the plan.
A good technical analysis that assumes rational players.
Unfortunately, once the facts are accepted that Trump is a Russian asset and he’s been assiduously cultivated by the KGB then FSB for decades, since the late 1970s, all rational analysis goes out the window.
My sources say Trump will do anything to avoid the compromat the Russians hold on him becoming public.
This is because it involves unassailable evidence that he was involved firsthand in international money laundering and other financial crimes, resulting in the theft of trillions of dollars from the American taxpayer, the US public purse.
But it gets worse, because the compromat also implicates him in hands-on child sex trafficking for the purposes, not only of immediate personal gratification, but also of blackmail of political, intelligence and business contacts, in order to gain power, control over others and untold personal wealth.
Release of this stuff—photos, videos, hard drives, emails, thousands of items—into the public domain would not just finish Trump's presidency via impeachment, it would land him in jail for life. And also an entire circle of accomplices.
So Trump will do literally anything to avoid this fate. He will do anything Putin demands of him, including betraying Ukraine utterly.
In addition to the general threat of release of this Russian-held compromat, we see an immediate direct incentive for Trump in this specific 28-point proposal. Here looms the prospect of billions of dollars of profit from forced economic deals in Ukraine's mineral deposits sector, in its industrial, defence and manufacturing base, and most terrifying of all, in its social infrastructure, in things like brainwashing a generation of enslaved Ukrainian children. Good words like Slav, salve, become evil utterances in Trump's mouth, as he salivates, glitter-eyed at this tantalising treasure.
There comes a point when detached academic analyses have to open up to the moral dimension of condemning a great evil, in order to prevent it before it happens. Think Hitler and 1933. But think also of the French king Louis XIV.
This 'ceasefire thingy' says it all about the state of the world at present. Truly shambolic rubbish probably scribbled out in early monk cyrillic script on vodka stained beermats.
I meant to add that, as in the case of Ukraine, the Palestinians had no agency in framing either the Trump 20 point plan or the Security Council Resolution. Unlike the Israelis or, in the case of Ukraine, the Russians. Thus, in both cases, one of the two sides is treated as a party on whom decisions developed in consultation with the other will be imposed. Hmm…
In context: lt contains significant Russian concessions. It comes at a time when internal and external ( military) pressures are very high on Ukraine. It is initially intended as a Ukrainian US agreement.
Russia (Putin) will not accept this as written but will want the US to pressurise Ukraine into further concessions before turning towards Russia; which rejects this in some way or modifies it thereby removing the unwelcome parts. In so doing it moves the positional advantage towards Russia and as Putin will bank it and continue the war. Further bonuses could be a breakdown in Ukrainian US relations or US European relations under the pressures it creates.
The Trump administration seem to specialise in dogs’ breakfasts. The 20 point plan for Gaza is one - full of gaps, missing any detail - and the Security Council resolution adopted last week is another, similarly short on detail. For example, the latter employs Chapter V11 language (continuing threat to regional peace and security, authorises the use of ‘all necessary means’ [code for use of force] but there is no reference to Chapter V11. This implies peace enforcement rather than peacekeeping, but no likely troop contributor is likely to be willing to use force against either side.
Another striking omission is the lack of an impartial ceasefire monitoring commission. The US and Israel seem to be left as judge and jury. With more than 300 Palestinians, many of them women and children, killed by the IDF since the plan was accepted by the two sides, this gives a new and very elastic meaning to the term ‘ceasefire’.
On point 14 about frozen assets, Lawrence asks: “What is with the US making a profit from this?“ It’s simple, in every engagement there has to be something for Trump.
Until Trump (or perhaps Rubio...nah Trump) comments that he supports the plan it amounts to very little. What I can say is that it demands the Ukrainians put a lot of trust in Trump and the russians. History has shown neither of them are trustworthy in any shape or form.
Trump and Witkoff, as a pair of property developers with mob connections just think they are doing deals over bits of property and land, aiming for opportunities and money in it for themselves, both in Gaza and Ukraine.
That there are people and states involved, that will be violently sacrificed to other mobsters is of no concern to them whatsoever.
And they would do the same to any supposed 'allies'.
There are at the least two fatal and dangerous flaws in this set of provisions. #1, it recognizes the right of countries to invade each other, seize territory and keep it. This violates the UN Charter and sets a dangerous precedent all over the world. #2, there are no reparations outside some partial use of frozen assets for all the destruction and other war crimes Russia has committed in Ukrainian territory. Other flaws: #3 is what it gives the USA for doing what? Why should the USA have any control over or profit from Ukraine's business going forward beyond what Ukraine has already agreed to pay the USA for support it is purchasing. And finally #4, should the guarantors of any peace treaty not be the EU or NATO?
This is a carbon copy of what happened at Munich during which the British and French agreed to allow Hitler to absorb the Sudaton lands of Czechoslovakia into Germany. These were the defendable borders of Czechoslovakia and once taken by Germany, Czechoslovakia was defenceless. Hitler invaded within six months and took Czechoslovakia into German control. This resulted in Czechoslovakia having the lowest casualties during WW2. The British went home and doubled defence spending within a year, resulting in having sufficient planes to win the Battle of Britain, being prepared for the evacuation of Dunkirk, and able to equip the army in Egypt that resulted in what Churchill called “the end of the beginning “ at Tobruk. After the war all the Germans were forcibly removed from the restored Sudaton lands.
Cannot help to express 100% agreement with the connotations to this daft agreement. And where is Brussels as far as their view on the subject is concerned? Too busy shedding tears and wringing hands again? It makes me angry being an EU citizen, to be honest.
Orbán, Kaczyński, Erdoğan, Fico... Ursula von der Leyen and her word salad chefs, even if detained in Buchenwald, would have given the SS the benefit of doubt: "Oh, but maybe these windowless barracks really are showers?".
“It’s a dog’s breakfast”. About as succinct and accurate a summary of the ‘plan’ as you’ll find
Assuming that these 28 points represent something “agreed” between Witkoff and Dmitriev (and thus with the approval of their masters Trump and Putin) it demonstrates that the USA cannot be considered an ally of western countries and democracy, it is willing to accept and condone naked military aggression and war crimes.
The US mediating between Russia and NATO demonstrates that the US no longer sees itself as a guarantor of Article 5 commitments or even part of NATO (shown also in its silence over threats and attacks on NATO countries that led to Article 4 discussions) . As said by John Woods below, this is akin to Munich. Guarantees in the Budapest memorandum from the US are shown as worthless. Perhaps to consider other US promises similarly.
Let us judge these words by Trump’s actions and words towards Putin and Russia. Trump has spoken often that Russia should be readmitted to the G8, so no surprise that this is one of the 28 points. Maybe Trump sees Ukraine getting a reasonable settlement from these points “after invading their larger neighbour”.
Trump and his cronies should not be permitted to impose their agreements without the presence or agreement of parties concerned, EU, Europe and of course Ukraine (Trump of course showed this method of negotiating with the Taliban and that ended well.)
It could be that Witkoff, Trump and others are merely just ignorant of history and the meaning of Latin terms, after all there is a great opportunity for USD 100 billion profit to go to each and their friends, along with the rare earth materials to be plundered from Ukraine. There is such ignorance in these proposals that there can be assumption that there are to gain headlines for Trump to claim another war solved towards his Noble Prize and give him and his acolytes an excuse to abandon Ukraine.
Maybe Trump is enacting revenge as Zelenskyy refused Trump’s corrupt offer of arms for material against Biden, and remember the Oval Office ambush. Europe and UK in particular need to show courage, and stand up to Trump, despite the costs. Trump has never imposed meaningful sanctions against Russia and objected to action he was forced to take following the Salisbury poisonings. Let’s just say what we see, Trump is Putin’s asset and a Russian ally. Intelligence sharing should follow this assumption too.
But where is concrete UK action, rearmament is still only a PowerPoint presentation and the UK remains committed to purchasing expensive military equipment from a dubious and capricious source.
I am sorry if this comes across as a rant, but I am so angry with Trump (and more so his “Von Papens” in Congress and press) and their actions. Yet, while hugging Zelenskyy, the UK prime minister “likes and respects” Trump, was willing to support negotiations when Trump suggested earlier this year, to risking fishing without a permit to the chief Oval Office bully, so maybe that explains the silence from Downing Street.
Of course they drew this up without consulting Ukraine. Says it all.
Naive question: couldn’t one add that every Russian provocation (airspace violations, drones, laser pointers, undersea cables) would automatically lead to an extension of the sanctions by 12 months (free-riders to Russia’s disadvantage)?
Thank you for your insightful annotations. It would be interesting to hear your thoughts on how Europe can/should position itself in response to the plan.
A good technical analysis that assumes rational players.
Unfortunately, once the facts are accepted that Trump is a Russian asset and he’s been assiduously cultivated by the KGB then FSB for decades, since the late 1970s, all rational analysis goes out the window.
My sources say Trump will do anything to avoid the compromat the Russians hold on him becoming public.
This is because it involves unassailable evidence that he was involved firsthand in international money laundering and other financial crimes, resulting in the theft of trillions of dollars from the American taxpayer, the US public purse.
But it gets worse, because the compromat also implicates him in hands-on child sex trafficking for the purposes, not only of immediate personal gratification, but also of blackmail of political, intelligence and business contacts, in order to gain power, control over others and untold personal wealth.
Release of this stuff—photos, videos, hard drives, emails, thousands of items—into the public domain would not just finish Trump's presidency via impeachment, it would land him in jail for life. And also an entire circle of accomplices.
So Trump will do literally anything to avoid this fate. He will do anything Putin demands of him, including betraying Ukraine utterly.
In addition to the general threat of release of this Russian-held compromat, we see an immediate direct incentive for Trump in this specific 28-point proposal. Here looms the prospect of billions of dollars of profit from forced economic deals in Ukraine's mineral deposits sector, in its industrial, defence and manufacturing base, and most terrifying of all, in its social infrastructure, in things like brainwashing a generation of enslaved Ukrainian children. Good words like Slav, salve, become evil utterances in Trump's mouth, as he salivates, glitter-eyed at this tantalising treasure.
There comes a point when detached academic analyses have to open up to the moral dimension of condemning a great evil, in order to prevent it before it happens. Think Hitler and 1933. But think also of the French king Louis XIV.
This 'ceasefire thingy' says it all about the state of the world at present. Truly shambolic rubbish probably scribbled out in early monk cyrillic script on vodka stained beermats.
I meant to add that, as in the case of Ukraine, the Palestinians had no agency in framing either the Trump 20 point plan or the Security Council Resolution. Unlike the Israelis or, in the case of Ukraine, the Russians. Thus, in both cases, one of the two sides is treated as a party on whom decisions developed in consultation with the other will be imposed. Hmm…
In context: lt contains significant Russian concessions. It comes at a time when internal and external ( military) pressures are very high on Ukraine. It is initially intended as a Ukrainian US agreement.
Russia (Putin) will not accept this as written but will want the US to pressurise Ukraine into further concessions before turning towards Russia; which rejects this in some way or modifies it thereby removing the unwelcome parts. In so doing it moves the positional advantage towards Russia and as Putin will bank it and continue the war. Further bonuses could be a breakdown in Ukrainian US relations or US European relations under the pressures it creates.
Very clever. Credit where it’s due.
The Trump administration seem to specialise in dogs’ breakfasts. The 20 point plan for Gaza is one - full of gaps, missing any detail - and the Security Council resolution adopted last week is another, similarly short on detail. For example, the latter employs Chapter V11 language (continuing threat to regional peace and security, authorises the use of ‘all necessary means’ [code for use of force] but there is no reference to Chapter V11. This implies peace enforcement rather than peacekeeping, but no likely troop contributor is likely to be willing to use force against either side.
Another striking omission is the lack of an impartial ceasefire monitoring commission. The US and Israel seem to be left as judge and jury. With more than 300 Palestinians, many of them women and children, killed by the IDF since the plan was accepted by the two sides, this gives a new and very elastic meaning to the term ‘ceasefire’.