BoJo admits Ukraine broke peace deal

Summary

Boris Johnson's recent admission that peace could have been achieved in April 2022 highlights the internal struggles within Ukraine, particularly the resistance from ultra-nationalist factions, such as the Azov Battalion. The transcript critiques the hypocrisy of political figures who once supported these groups but now blame them for the failure of peace talks. It emphasizes the shift in narrative, where these political figures, having used proxies like Zelensky and Azov for their own agendas, now abandon them once they are no longer useful. This creates a complex picture of political expediency and shifting allegiances in the ongoing conflict.

Takeaways

• 😀 Boris Johnson admitted that the conflict in Ukraine could have been resolved as early as April 2022.
• 😀 Zelensky's 2019 agreement with Putin, which included prisoner exchanges and the Minsk accord, was undermined by Ukrainian ultranationalists, not Russia.
• 😀 Johnson acknowledged that the primary obstacle to peace was not Putin, but far-right Ukrainian groups like the Azov Battalion.
• 😀 Zelensky, who was elected on a platform of peace, attempted to negotiate with Putin, but was blocked by Ukrainian nationalists.
• 😀 Johnson's statements reflect a rare admission of truth regarding the failure of peace talks in Ukraine, revealing internal Ukrainian resistance to compromise.
• 😀 Despite blaming Ukrainian nationalists for the breakdown in peace talks, Johnson himself had supported their agenda and met with Azov Battalion members.
• 😀 Johnson’s role in obstructing peace negotiations, particularly the Istanbul track, is highlighted as a major factor in the conflict's escalation.
• 😀 The narrative now being spun by Boris Johnson is one of shifting blame to Ukrainian ultranationalists, who were once allies in the struggle against Russia.
• 😀 Johnson's stance represents a typical tactic where a proxy is used until no longer needed, after which they are scapegoated for failures.
• 😀 The situation reflects a broader pattern of international politics, where influential players use local forces for their agenda and discard them when they become inconvenient.

Q & A

What admission did Boris Johnson make regarding the situation in Ukraine?

Boris Johnson admitted that the issue could have been resolved as early as April 2022, suggesting that the main obstacle was not Russia or Putin but Ukrainian nationalists and far-right factions within Ukraine.

What incident in the White House is referenced in the transcript?

The transcript refers to a moment when Ukrainian President Zelensky had a confrontation with JD Vance in the White House. Vance suggested diplomacy, and Zelensky reacted by invoking a 2019 agreement signed with Putin in Paris, which he claimed Putin did not uphold.

What were the key elements of the December 2019 agreement between Zelensky and Putin?

The December 2019 agreement between Zelensky and Putin involved a prisoner exchange and the implementation of the Minsk Accords, which were meant to end the fighting that followed the 2014 Maidan coup in Ukraine.

Why did Boris Johnson acknowledge that the problem was not Putin or Russia?

Boris Johnson acknowledged that the true issue was Ukrainian nationalists and ultranationalist factions, who were the ones obstructing the peace process and the implementation of the December 2019 agreement, not Putin or Russia.

What role did Ukrainian ultranationalists play in the breakdown of peace efforts?

Ukrainian ultranationalists, including far-right groups like the Azov Battalion, opposed the compromise necessary for peace and were a significant factor in the failure to implement the Minsk Accords and other peace efforts.

How did Zelensky's actions contradict his statements about the failure of the peace deal?

Zelensky had welcomed the Azov Battalion as heroes and even met with them while showing support for their agenda. This contradicts his later statements blaming these same groups for the failure of peace efforts in Ukraine.

What was Boris Johnson’s stance on the Azov Battalion?

Boris Johnson initially supported the Azov Battalion and considered them heroes, which makes his later criticism of them for hindering peace efforts appear inconsistent.

What does the transcript suggest about Boris Johnson's role in the conflict?

The transcript suggests that Boris Johnson was a key figure in preventing peace negotiations, especially the Istanbul track, by supporting the ultranationalist factions in Ukraine. It implies that he acted as a proxy for these groups, hindering diplomatic solutions.

What is the broader implication of Boris Johnson’s admission regarding peace in Ukraine?

Boris Johnson’s admission highlights a shift in blame from Russia to internal Ukrainian factions, revealing the complexity of the conflict and suggesting that foreign influence and internal politics were crucial factors in the failure of peace efforts.

How does the transcript describe the dynamics of being a proxy in geopolitical conflicts?

The transcript describes how being a proxy involves being used by more powerful sponsors, who may later discard or blame the proxy when they are no longer useful. This is exemplified by Boris Johnson blaming Ukrainian ultranationalists for the failure of peace after previously supporting their agenda.