this post was submitted on 20 Jul 2025
106 points (97.3% liked)

Europe

6729 readers
832 users here now

News and information from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: La Mancha, Spain. Feel free to post submissions for banner images.)

Rules (2024-08-30)

  1. This is an English-language community. Comments should be in English. Posts can link to non-English news sources when providing a full-text translation in the post description. Automated translations are fine, as long as they don't overly distort the content.
  2. No links to misinformation or commercial advertising. When you post outdated/historic articles, add the year of publication to the post title. Infographics must include a source and a year of creation; if possible, also provide a link to the source.
  3. Be kind to each other, and argue in good faith. Don't post direct insults nor disrespectful and condescending comments. Don't troll nor incite hatred. Don't look for novel argumentation strategies at Wikipedia's List of fallacies.
  4. No bigotry, sexism, racism, antisemitism, islamophobia, dehumanization of minorities, or glorification of National Socialism. We follow German law; don't question the statehood of Israel.
  5. Be the signal, not the noise: Strive to post insightful comments. Add "/s" when you're being sarcastic (and don't use it to break rule no. 3).
  6. If you link to paywalled information, please provide also a link to a freely available archived version. Alternatively, try to find a different source.
  7. Light-hearted content, memes, and posts about your European everyday belong in other communities.
  8. Don't evade bans. If we notice ban evasion, that will result in a permanent ban for all the accounts we can associate with you.
  9. No posts linking to speculative reporting about ongoing events with unclear backgrounds. Please wait at least 12 hours. (E.g., do not post breathless reporting on an ongoing terror attack.)
  10. Always provide context with posts: Don't post uncontextualized images or videos, and don't start discussions without giving some context first.

(This list may get expanded as necessary.)

Posts that link to the following sources will be removed

Unless they're the only sources, please also avoid The Sun, Daily Mail, any "thinktank" type organization, and non-Lemmy social media. Don't link to Twitter directly, instead use xcancel.com. For Reddit, use old:reddit:com

(Lists may get expanded as necessary.)

Ban lengths, etc.

We will use some leeway to decide whether to remove a comment.

If need be, there are also bans: 3 days for lighter offenses, 7 or 14 days for bigger offenses, and permanent bans for people who don't show any willingness to participate productively. If we think the ban reason is obvious, we may not specifically write to you.

If you want to protest a removal or ban, feel free to write privately to the primary mod account @EuroMod@feddit.org

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
federalreverse@feddit.org
poVoq@slrpnk.net
anzo@programming.dev
EuroMod@feddit.org
106
Ukraine proposes fresh peace talks with Russia next week (www.straitstimes.com)
submitted 3 days ago by schizoidman@lemmy.zip to c/europe@feddit.org
40 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Kyiv has proposed to Moscow a new round of peace talks next week, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky said on July 19, hours after Russian strikes across Ukraine claimed more lives.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Saleh@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The question is, whether Russia is "right" to feel threatened, not whether the consequent actions were right.

The comment i replied to outright denied Russia to be allowed to feel threatened and ridiculed it.

And this why we keep getting into escalations. We deny other countries security interests, while declaring ours as righteous.

[–] richardwonka@mas.to 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

@Saleh I’m trying to think of an instance when NATO was used as an excuse for an invasion from any side other than Russia’s invasion by Ukraine.

The US have reliably made up their own excuses for their transgressions. I can’t currently remember them using NATO as an excuse.

I honestly don’t see how NATO membership is a threat.

Can it be construed as one? Surely - as much as one can find “weapons of mass destruction” when squinting hard enough. But that is then again not related to NATO.

[–] Saleh@feddit.org 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russia%E2%80%93NATO_relations#Founding_Act

In 1999, Russia condemned the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia,[54][55] which was done without a prior authorization by the United Nations Security Council, required by the international law.[56] For many in Moscow, a combination of NATO’s incorporation of Eastern Europe and its military attack on sovereign Yugoslavia exposed American promises of Russia’s inclusion into a new European security architecture as a deceit. Yeltsin’s critics said: ‘Belgrade today, Moscow tomorrow!’ [23]

...

A drastic reversal in the US and NATO policy toward Russia occurred in December 2001. Most importantly, the US unilaterally withdrew from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty with Russia in 2001–2002, which was followed by the US signing bilateral agreements with Poland and Romania (with NATO support) to build ballistic missile defense (BMD) systems in their territories, against Russian wishes. Although none of these events depended on NATO enlargement - not even the agreement to build BMD sites in Romania and Poland, given that the United States also has bilateral BMD equipment arrangements with a wide variety of non-NATO members (including Bahrain, Egypt, Israel, Japan, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Taiwan, and the United Arab Emirates) - this withdrawal was interpreted by the Russian political elite, and by many Western political scientists, as US exploitation of political and military weakness in Russia at the time, and led to the loss of Russia's trust in America's political intentions.[23]

The US also called article 5 after 9/11 and the Afghanistan invasion was a "NATO and friends" mission. Also the Iraq invasion was done by various NATO members, even if it wasnt formally a NATO mission. However even countries not involved in the fightinf were provising logistics such as Germany.

[–] richardwonka@mas.to 0 points 2 days ago

@Saleh so your argument is:

Russia wanted other sovereign countries to do its bidding, but they didn’t comply.

Saying that’s NATO’s fault is the political equivalent for throwing your toys out the pram.

Saleh, you are disqualifying yourself from the discussion.

Other countries don’t have to comply with Russia’s wishes. And if they don’t, Russia still doesn’t get to invade them.