This is kinda where I'm at. He doesn't have handlers and isn't being issued directives, he's just sympathetic to autocrats/strongmen, is easy to manipulate, and has let people who are being actively cultivated as Russian assets into his inner circle who are trying to exploit the first two facts. (Mostly successfully)
Maybe without the bank and direct ties to russia. Maybe without the back channels trump put in place during Trump1.
He is 100% beholden to russia. We can debate the capacity but thats it. Go look up trump circa 1985-1999. Jack smiths case. You can proble google “trump russian” and have a weeks worth of reading.
True. He's trying to do anything just to leave NATO. First he said all NATO members have to increase military spending, which he was sure we won't do, but we did and now he's simply looking for any excuse.
The Dumb Administration must be really dumb if they think the Ukraine, or anyone else in the world, would believe Dumb will require the US would hold its end of the bargain. As long as Dumb is POTUS, no one in the world, except perhaps the Russians, would trust what Dump said.
This is too short sighted. This is what the American people vote for. None of our allies should rely on us because one election cycle we can have reasonable leadership and the next we throw all of it away. Again...
Upon such attack, each member state is to assist by taking "such action as [the member state] deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area."
He could send his thoughts and prayers and say that the USA held their end of the bargain.
This is what a lot of people who keep screaming "article 5" every time there is a minor infringement don't realise. The article is very weak. The threat of it is actually bigger than the like invocation. No one's said it explicitly, but I think there is a tacit understanding that it's likely territorial
In essence though, article 5 is more notable for the wiggle room it permits a signatory to do the absolute minimum
It says Russia will honour Ukraine's borders. There is no benefit to Ukraine signing any additional treaty with Russia. Doing so would be completely meaningless on every level.
Although Ukraine would benefit from any agreements with neighbours that guarantee security intervention when (not if) Russia attacks again.
The ideal solution is Ukraine joins NATO and thet would likely stop the Russian aggression.
Russia is currently fielding donkeys on the front line, and using propaganda and wishful thinking, not troops, to "take over" cities like Kupiansk. Russia has lost the war and at this point is simply carrying on like terrorists, bombing random buildings and murdering civilians, but achieving no concrete war gains.
Europe on it's own could very quickly bring Russia to its knees in any open conflict.
Budapest Memorandum does say that US is obliged to respect Ukranian territorial integrity. Trying to force them into giving up territory breaks Budapest Memorandum.
It provides as much of a security guarantee as Article 5 does, with its "as it deems necessary" language and required unanimous agreement of the NAC.
Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to
Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation ofNuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act
of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in whlch nuclear weapons are used.
The US put forward a UNSC resolution on action to end the Ukraine war in 2022 which is exactly what they said they would do. It was vetoed.
Nowhere in that paragraph does it say that the US would commit to direct intervention on behalf of Ukraine so I don’t understand how you are arguing they didn’t uphold their commitments.
Right. I said it was useless. It is just as useless as NATO article 5, which you apparently have never read.
Edit: To make it clear, both NATO article 5 and the Budapest memorandum are meaningless commitments.
They have teeth only to the extent that their signatories are willing to robustly project a willingness to fully respond, as the documents themselves don't require any meaningful response.
The Budapest memorandum was perceived as an article 5 type guarantee which Russia blatantly violated and the United States tepidly satisfied.
Trump has given plenty of indications that that will be his response if it comes to an actual NATO article 5 situation as well.
I’m more familiar with NATO agreements than you are. I’ve been in combined-joint commands and been trained and educated along side European allied officers. I’m intimately familiar with how the alliance works and have pretty in depth understanding of it from both US and European sources.
Article 5 is as strong of a commitment as you’re going to get any nation to agree to. Nobody is going to sacrifice their sovereignty by agreeing to specific or unsustainable security arrangements. Article 5 ensures each member of the alliance commits what they are capable of providing when called upon for mutual support.
That’s a completely reasonable expectation. Imagine in a scenario where Russia attacks in Europe and China attacks Taiwan, and maybe NK attacks SK simultaneously. The US has security requirements in each conflict. Would you expect them to completely abandon the Pacific allies to unilaterally defend Europe? Or is it more reasonable for Europe to take the lead in defending Europe and the US provides material/logistics/intelligence support where it can? That had been the underlying communications between the US and European leadership under the Trump administrators regarding NATO. Europe needs to be prepared to take the lead in Europe should the need arise. It’s been discussed in depth in our circles for a while, the Trump administration (for better or worse) just made it way more public for the average person and in a completely non-diplomatic way.
Not to take the other guys side in this but wargame this out with me really quick. We give "article 5" guarantees to Ukraine and the war ceases. 5 Years from now Russia kicks the door in again what is our response? Europe take the lead despite the fact they can't even meet the current munitions needs for Ukraine? While we the US will continue selling you arms/munitions and maybe send intelligence data (that we keep threatening to end btw) like we are currently doing. So in what way does this change the state of affairs except maybe buy Ukraine and Russia time to rearm and resupply. I also feel like this is ignoring the US' current posture of lets end the war so our corporations can come back in and make bank off the resource extraction that we keep trying to play both sides on.
All I'm seeing here is an actual weakening of NATO as our allies begin to doubt our commitment to the alliance. We have more carriers than pretty much the rest of the world combined. I don't see why the navy and all their pretty boats wouldn't be able to aid our pacific allies while our army and airforce provide support to the European theater.
I’m more familiar with NATO agreements than you are. I’ve been in combined-joint commands and been trained and educated along side European allied officers. I’m intimately familiar with how the alliance works and have pretty in depth understanding of it from both US and European sources.
With all due respect, does that experience have any relevance when trying to answer these questions nowadays, where we have a president with the behavior and intelligence of a toddler running the US? I somewhat doubt it it means much these days, because that guy has the last say in these matters, regarding US support. I mean, what gives you the confidence, that any of what your experience was, still applies?
You're not even understanding the Trump position. The argument isn't that the Budapest memorandum isn't relevant, but rather that the US went to the Security Council as it was promised in that memorandum and the the proposal was vetoed.
The thing one has to understand about Trump is that he just says whatever the fuck without giving a single thought about what it might mean or what it's consequence might be.
These are the same empty promises that got Ukraine into this mess, the best way for peace is through arms and they gave up their nuclear weapons only to have their people slaughtered afterwards
I’m waiting for him to try to invoke article 5 over Venezuela and wait for the rest of NATO to say no to give him pretext to reject another members invocation of article 5
Article 5 can only be invoked if your country's core territory (defined in article 6) is being attacked. You can't just invoke it if you're the one who's invading others.
It just says you’ll provide them with support, not what kind of support. The US could decide to send them a manual on how to shoot and that could technically fulfill the requirements for what’s described in Article 5 of NATO.
which is so stupid because in its core, NATO was originally a „countries under the heavy influence and protection of, but also dependence on, the USA“. The US spent multiple generations worth of tax dollars to build that sphere of influence, just to cut themself off of it now? The Marshall plan for example was to spent 140 billion dollars in today’s money in the 40s/50s on Germany and Western Europe in order to have a reliable partner and close ally in Europe, a strong adversary to Russia, and then you cut ties?
And Germany is like „uh okay thanks for the help 70 years ago but what was all of this about now?“
The only logical explanation for me is that Russia was just successful in implanting someone to dismantle the US both domestically and on the world stage, from within and in plain view.
that should tell you how valid Article 5 truly is. they don’t want to be binded by it & the other articles. the guy you are replying to is as anti-NATO as it gets. christ.
Yeah, our good will is gone. Through every change of administration, the constant was that we never really seriously damaged our credibility with our allies. The last year has completely wrecked that credibility so that even if we do elect someone who tried to repair those relationships, there’s zero reason to trust that someone new won’t just come destroy it again on a whim in 4 years.
Having a "buffer zone" in the Donbas is much, much more reliable security guarantee against Russian invasion than giving up Donbas and relying on US and some "guarantees" on paper.
Honestly its more 'you can't trust anyone' on security guarantees. I agree the Trump administration is the worst offender, but pretty much any European with F-35 could end the war by joining on the Ukrainian side. We've seen the F-35 battle vs Russian Air defense battle before, and it's pretty one sided. It would absolutely move the needle, but war is always going to take bodies on the line too.
You just have to be willing to throw 50,000+ souls and quite a bit of treasure into the meat grinder. So far even the most generous European nations are nowhere even remotely close to that level of commitment. If they won't do it now, why would you think they would do it in the future? Legally binding is not a thing in geo-politics.
“At the same time, several European leaders have advised Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy not to rush into an agreement, particularly if it involves territorial concessions.”
Just to be clear: We're talking about the same US that currently considers legalities a pesky hurdle to circumvent, lie their way through, or outright ignore, and reneges on contracts and agreements so regularly that it can be more trusted to break them than to adhere by them? The same US whose plans to corrode and undermine the EU just leaked? The very US that wants to cut and run from NATO?
It seems such a terrible act of self-sabotage by this US administration to so toxically destroy such a broad and strong alliance with Europe that the Americans have spent so much energy crafting for so long. There were plenty of ways to maintain that bond while pivoting in other directions. The public commentary here in Europe is pretty unanimous that the US is a country positioning itself as on its own, isolating itself, and the closest relationship the US President is forging is with Russia. What a shitshow. The relationship with Europe was to the benefit of the US, and the breakdown in trust spearheaded by this administration will have affected trade, tourism, education, as well as political and diplomatic partnerships.
USA is pivoting away from Europe, Canada, Latin America and into Russia and Middle East as partners. Trump has been leading that charge based on his prior relationships with them. Part of this is his pettiness to come back at all the countries and institutions that debanked him and denied him loans. Part of it is that he’s kind of right to abandon current trade relationships. As long as the Middle East is in his pocket he can basically rewrite the entire shape of the global economy because they’re on the same page and he doesn’t have to work with hostile European bureaucracies to effect the change he want. And the change he wants is all in self service and to the billionaire class.
The economic philosophy of Europe leans more socialist. Just look at the tax system. USA is hurtling towards late stage hyper capitalism. Unfettered free market where billionaires can do whatever they want and destroy anything that isn’t them including the worker class. In a different timeline heavy restrictions would have been placed on AI until transition plans and safety nets and hell UBI were on the table but that’s not our current reality. Our current reality in the USA is- either be a billionaire or get fucked, leave the USA. And maga is fully behind this.
Oh and leaving the USA won’t fix anything. The rest of the world will be forced to follow the USAs psychotic footsteps to stay relevant and to maintain their own sovereignty. So these changes will eventually impact the entire world where there will be a loosening of restrictions on institutions and businesses just to keep up with the USA. It’s a catastrophic race to an economic singularity where everyone outside of the .01% will barely be permitted to subsist. The squeeze we’re all feeling around the globe in our pocketbooks and our daily lives isn’t a bug it’s a feature.
Nothing will change until there’s a global revolt and that will never happen because the billionaire class is advancing AI and robotics to have their personal armies to protect them and keep their businesses moving. (And yes it sounds ridiculous to hear robot armies but we seem to be conducting wars mostly through drones these days anyway).
Bottom line is it’s always been and always will be about money and specifically money for the already rich. Nothing else matters. Look at musk he went on a multimillion dollar tear politically so he could establish more of a foothold in the White House- why? For philosophical reasons? Fuck no. He was the worlds biggest welfare queen and Biden refuses to continue enabling him so he took steps to ensure the mothers milk would always flow to him and his businesses. It always is and always has been only about the money.
The part where the current administration is made of people who wouldn't keep a promise, and has undercut the United States by cancelling promises made by prior administrations, suggests that "legally binding" is a waste of everyone's time.
No nation or no person ever really manages perfect honesty, but the US has run so far away from even trying that you'd be a fool to trust this country now.
If I were Zelenskyy, I wouldn't trust any deal that didn't put several thousand Americans within 5 miles of whatever line of demarcation is established - and I wouldn't trust even that until the troops were already there.
Trump has repeatedly violated legally binding agreements without consequence, and we’re supposed to believe this one would be upheld if he didn’t feel like it? Sorry, but between our president, and a judicial system that has repeatedly shielded him from any legal issues, there is no deal that involves promising future action that is worth a damn. The presidential immunity case on its own makes ignoring treaties (which this already is weaker than, no chance in hell he goes through Congress) a completely valid action, as they’re “official duties.”
The US under Trump has completely shattered any idea that it will respect past commitments. Any country relying on them for future assurances is a fool.
Why would ANYONE believe ANYTHING president pedofile says....EVER?! He's a traitor to his own country. Why would he be trusted to protect someone else's?
This didn't actually promise they would do anything if someone breaks it. Half the reason France never signed was that it wasn't worth anything.
The Budapest Memorandum is not a treaty, and it does not confer any new legal obligations for signatory states. It was written in a way to avoid an impression of legal obligation.\54]) Under the agreement the Russian Federation provided security assurances to Ukraine in the form of promising neither to attack nor to threaten to attack them. The other signatories (the United States and the United Kingdom) pledged non-military support to Ukraine in exchange for its adherence to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons. The memorandum bundled together a set of assurances that Ukraine had already held from the Conference on Security and Co-operation in Europe (CSCE) Final Act, the United Nations Charter and the Non-Proliferation Treaty,\2]) but the Ukrainian government found it valuable to have these assurances in a Ukraine-specific document.\55])\56])
What in the bipolar fuck is this? One day it’s give them everything to win. Then it’s give Russia land. Then it’s remove us from NATO. Then it’s keep us in NATO but thy get none of our cash or guns. Now it’s they get article 5 protection?!
A man with no respect for the law and considers the concept of "legally binding" to be an inconvenience he can sidestep, isn't offering any guarantees. Anything offer from Trump or Putin isn't worth the paper on which it's printed.
“We want to provide Ukrainians with security guarantees that, on the one hand, are not hollow…”
You mean like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed by Ukraine, Russia, the U.S., and the UK, where Ukraine gave up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances, including respect for its sovereignty, independence, and borders?
Yeah. I would trust nothing that comes out of this regime.
He's pulling from NATO. So much for that Article V. Why would the new "Article V-style" be any better? Once you lose any credibility, it's gone forever.
... Isn't the US busily removing themselves from NATO? And how long ago was it that they were talking about a 'peace' with Putin that would involve Ukraine basically surrendering everything Russia even touched during this invasion? A month?
Trump is lying. Don’t do it Ukraine. You already got burned once when you agreed to give your nukes to Russia for US security guarantees. Trump is desperate to do Putin’s bidding; Trump would love to do it with a simple lie since that is how he’s solved all of his previous problems. They only reason he follows through on some things he says, are for things of little consequence so he can tell his detractors, “see, look, I wasn’t lying and you have TDS.”
US ready to offer what they can’t reliably provide, for concessions Ukraine would never in a million years make, in a repeat of promises in exchange for giving up real world means of self defense.
This is not happening anywhere outside of rhetoric, for many, many reasons.
This is absolutely meaningless coming from the US. And regardless, Trump will just yank back the offer next week when he decides to kiss Putin's ass again for whatever reason.
You mean- the same Article 5 Guarantees that the administration has publicly claimed they won’t follow through on? Yeah— so they are basically promising to not enforce security. Got it.
Didn’t Russia, Ukraine and the USA sign an agreement in the 90s? Something about Urkraine being guaranteed security and sovereignty if they give up their nuclear weapons.
“Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and the United States of America reaffirm their commitment to seek immediate United Nations Security Council action to provide assistance to Ukraine, as a non-nuclear-weapon state party to the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, if Ukraine should become a victim of an act of aggression or an object of a threat of aggression in whlch nuclear weapons are used.”
Article 5
“Upon such attack, each member state is to assist by taking ‘such action as [the member state] deems necessary, including the use of armed force, to restore and maintain the security of the North Atlantic area.’”
Read the actual Article 5. The phrasing is piss-weak ("such action as it deems necessary") and doesn't really carry that many obligations.
The true value of NATO has always been the informal agreement that the US and Europe stand together as "the West" and would defend each other with military means, with Article 5 merely as the framework for that promise.
Handing out an equivalent text means nothing if the US isn't committed to seeing Ukraine (or Europe, for that matter...) as belonging to a common sphere of nations, which Trump is clearly not. Transactional politics is incompatible with a functional NATO.
Trump didn’t keep the trade agreements with Mexico and Canada that HE made, why would anyone on earth think he would keep this agreement? He cheated on three wives. He went bankrupt instead of honoring his agreements to payback creditors. The man is incapable of honoring anything he signs.
The US can’t even follow the law and hold its felon leaders accountable, if you think they will honor a protection clause I have some watches and bibles to sell you.
“We won’t really help you right now while you’re literally being attacked. But just give up everything then we’ll totally protect you next time, trust me bro”
Didn't Trump recently say he wouldn't automatically observe Article 5 if a NATO country got attacked?
Promises are worthless when a country can break treaties on a whim.
He also wants the US to exit NATO. His security guarantees are worth less than the paper they are written on
Bottom line, Trump doesn’t know what the hell he’s doing. Although MAGA will say it’s his negotiation genius in play.
The bottom line is that :
1) either he is stupid when it comes to international geopolitics. Only motivated by greed.
Or
2) He is a Russian mole, advancing Russia's agenda across Europe St the expense of the US national security interests.
In this case, likely both.
I think that the greed is more likely than an active Russian agent. There likely are effective agents for Russia around him.
What could/would a Russian agent have done differently without losing probable deniability (even more)
This is kinda where I'm at. He doesn't have handlers and isn't being issued directives, he's just sympathetic to autocrats/strongmen, is easy to manipulate, and has let people who are being actively cultivated as Russian assets into his inner circle who are trying to exploit the first two facts. (Mostly successfully)
Maybe without the bank and direct ties to russia. Maybe without the back channels trump put in place during Trump1.
He is 100% beholden to russia. We can debate the capacity but thats it. Go look up trump circa 1985-1999. Jack smiths case. You can proble google “trump russian” and have a weeks worth of reading.
Funny the negotiating genius who declared bankruptcy multiple times managed to come up with "surrender".
True. He's trying to do anything just to leave NATO. First he said all NATO members have to increase military spending, which he was sure we won't do, but we did and now he's simply looking for any excuse.
Cant be in NATO and 100% support Putin
The Dumb Administration must be really dumb if they think the Ukraine, or anyone else in the world, would believe Dumb will require the US would hold its end of the bargain. As long as Dumb is POTUS, no one in the world, except perhaps the Russians, would trust what Dump said.
This is too short sighted. This is what the American people vote for. None of our allies should rely on us because one election cycle we can have reasonable leadership and the next we throw all of it away. Again...
“If I don’t know what I’m doing, my opponent sure won’t“ - Sun Tzu
“The more confused I am the harder it is for my enemy to formulate strategy”
it is the 8 dimensional chess, we cant possibly understand
Unless he is purposely trying to weaken the USA, in which case it actually does seem like he knows what he's doing.
Pretty similar to the treaty Ukraine signed with Russia that if they gave up their nuclear weapons Russia would respect their sovereignty
And a good example of how an authoritarian leader can just ignore any prior obligations.
US promises. Ha! Worth their weight in gold.
Unless it's Trump brand paper, which is somehow worth even less.
‘The fuhrers guarantees guarantee nothing’
Article 5 states :
He could send his thoughts and prayers and say that the USA held their end of the bargain.
This is what a lot of people who keep screaming "article 5" every time there is a minor infringement don't realise. The article is very weak. The threat of it is actually bigger than the like invocation. No one's said it explicitly, but I think there is a tacit understanding that it's likely territorial
In essence though, article 5 is more notable for the wiggle room it permits a signatory to do the absolute minimum
Both the US and Russia already gave Ukraine security guarantees when Ukraine agreed to give up its Soviet nuclear weapons.
It's pretty obvious how much those were worth.
The Budapest Memorandum says nothing about defending them. It only says we wouldn't threaten our attack them.
It says Russia will honour Ukraine's borders. There is no benefit to Ukraine signing any additional treaty with Russia. Doing so would be completely meaningless on every level.
Although Ukraine would benefit from any agreements with neighbours that guarantee security intervention when (not if) Russia attacks again.
The ideal solution is Ukraine joins NATO and thet would likely stop the Russian aggression.
Russia is currently fielding donkeys on the front line, and using propaganda and wishful thinking, not troops, to "take over" cities like Kupiansk. Russia has lost the war and at this point is simply carrying on like terrorists, bombing random buildings and murdering civilians, but achieving no concrete war gains.
Europe on it's own could very quickly bring Russia to its knees in any open conflict.
Europe should get on with bringing Russia to its knees.
Budapest Memorandum does say that US is obliged to respect Ukranian territorial integrity. Trying to force them into giving up territory breaks Budapest Memorandum.
The US did not give Ukraine a security guarantee. .Read the Budapest Memorandum. It isnt that long.
I've read the document.
It provides as much of a security guarantee as Article 5 does, with its "as it deems necessary" language and required unanimous agreement of the NAC.
The US put forward a UNSC resolution on action to end the Ukraine war in 2022 which is exactly what they said they would do. It was vetoed.
Nowhere in that paragraph does it say that the US would commit to direct intervention on behalf of Ukraine so I don’t understand how you are arguing they didn’t uphold their commitments.
Right. I said it was useless. It is just as useless as NATO article 5, which you apparently have never read.
Edit: To make it clear, both NATO article 5 and the Budapest memorandum are meaningless commitments.
They have teeth only to the extent that their signatories are willing to robustly project a willingness to fully respond, as the documents themselves don't require any meaningful response.
The Budapest memorandum was perceived as an article 5 type guarantee which Russia blatantly violated and the United States tepidly satisfied.
Trump has given plenty of indications that that will be his response if it comes to an actual NATO article 5 situation as well.
I’m more familiar with NATO agreements than you are. I’ve been in combined-joint commands and been trained and educated along side European allied officers. I’m intimately familiar with how the alliance works and have pretty in depth understanding of it from both US and European sources.
Article 5 is as strong of a commitment as you’re going to get any nation to agree to. Nobody is going to sacrifice their sovereignty by agreeing to specific or unsustainable security arrangements. Article 5 ensures each member of the alliance commits what they are capable of providing when called upon for mutual support.
That’s a completely reasonable expectation. Imagine in a scenario where Russia attacks in Europe and China attacks Taiwan, and maybe NK attacks SK simultaneously. The US has security requirements in each conflict. Would you expect them to completely abandon the Pacific allies to unilaterally defend Europe? Or is it more reasonable for Europe to take the lead in defending Europe and the US provides material/logistics/intelligence support where it can? That had been the underlying communications between the US and European leadership under the Trump administrators regarding NATO. Europe needs to be prepared to take the lead in Europe should the need arise. It’s been discussed in depth in our circles for a while, the Trump administration (for better or worse) just made it way more public for the average person and in a completely non-diplomatic way.
Not to take the other guys side in this but wargame this out with me really quick. We give "article 5" guarantees to Ukraine and the war ceases. 5 Years from now Russia kicks the door in again what is our response? Europe take the lead despite the fact they can't even meet the current munitions needs for Ukraine? While we the US will continue selling you arms/munitions and maybe send intelligence data (that we keep threatening to end btw) like we are currently doing. So in what way does this change the state of affairs except maybe buy Ukraine and Russia time to rearm and resupply. I also feel like this is ignoring the US' current posture of lets end the war so our corporations can come back in and make bank off the resource extraction that we keep trying to play both sides on.
All I'm seeing here is an actual weakening of NATO as our allies begin to doubt our commitment to the alliance. We have more carriers than pretty much the rest of the world combined. I don't see why the navy and all their pretty boats wouldn't be able to aid our pacific allies while our army and airforce provide support to the European theater.
With all due respect, does that experience have any relevance when trying to answer these questions nowadays, where we have a president with the behavior and intelligence of a toddler running the US? I somewhat doubt it it means much these days, because that guy has the last say in these matters, regarding US support. I mean, what gives you the confidence, that any of what your experience was, still applies?
The Budapest Memorandum was nothing like Article 5. Nothing. I would explain why if I didnt think it was a waste of time.
Not by anybody that was paying attention. Much has been written about it being a "promise" not a "guarantee"
“To seek immediate UN Security Council action to provide assistance…”
The US is not the security council.
there.
IF nukes are ever a part of the war.
OR a threat of nukes.
How many times has Russia threatened to nuke Europe for helping Ukraine?
"In which nuclear weapons are used."
Trump is the scum of the universe, but I don't see how you can say he violated the terms.
Read the phrases right before that.
You're not even understanding the Trump position. The argument isn't that the Budapest memorandum isn't relevant, but rather that the US went to the Security Council as it was promised in that memorandum and the the proposal was vetoed.
There ya go, you found it.
That’s not true
Trump means that the EU will do it. He is giving a lot of work to the EU while he just wants to collect the profits.
The thing one has to understand about Trump is that he just says whatever the fuck without giving a single thought about what it might mean or what it's consequence might be.
As a Canadian I can assure you, Trump's word is about as good as dog shit
These are the same empty promises that got Ukraine into this mess, the best way for peace is through arms and they gave up their nuclear weapons only to have their people slaughtered afterwards
Ya but what your missing is how much money Trump could make if he helps Russia return to normal trade with the world
He would kill any number of American soldiers for a few dollars
Meanwhile America would likely never defend Ukraine
I think we also have laws against killing unarmed civilians, particularly in a shipwreck.
Funny isn't the only time Article 5 has been activated was by the US after 9/11?
No...the US did not activate Article 5. NATO did without the US requesting it. I was alive in 2001 and listening to the 24 hour news coverage.
“Can’t sue us if you’re wiped out completely.” - republican logic
Don’t hear whatever he says man. Just see whatever he does. He’s being flip flopping every time.
I’m waiting for him to try to invoke article 5 over Venezuela and wait for the rest of NATO to say no to give him pretext to reject another members invocation of article 5
Article 5 can only be invoked if your country's core territory (defined in article 6) is being attacked. You can't just invoke it if you're the one who's invading others.
A guarantee is only as strong as the government honoring it.
Article 5 is not a binding as you think though…
It just says you’ll provide them with support, not what kind of support. The US could decide to send them a manual on how to shoot and that could technically fulfill the requirements for what’s described in Article 5 of NATO.
Trump and Republicans are also pushing to get us out of NATO. So I think that should tell you how much they think of these types of guarantees.
which is so stupid because in its core, NATO was originally a „countries under the heavy influence and protection of, but also dependence on, the USA“. The US spent multiple generations worth of tax dollars to build that sphere of influence, just to cut themself off of it now? The Marshall plan for example was to spent 140 billion dollars in today’s money in the 40s/50s on Germany and Western Europe in order to have a reliable partner and close ally in Europe, a strong adversary to Russia, and then you cut ties?
And Germany is like „uh okay thanks for the help 70 years ago but what was all of this about now?“
The only logical explanation for me is that Russia was just successful in implanting someone to dismantle the US both domestically and on the world stage, from within and in plain view.
that should tell you how valid Article 5 truly is. they don’t want to be binded by it & the other articles. the guy you are replying to is as anti-NATO as it gets. christ.
Yeah article 5-like guarantee is pretty worthless.
A US enforced no-fly zone to secure elections and a transfer of custody of Tomahawks would be way more tangible
U.S.
Legally binding
Guarantee
No, these words don't go together.
"Yeah trust us bro"
Exactly.
The US is a traitorous, unreliable nation.
so much worse
Yeah, our good will is gone. Through every change of administration, the constant was that we never really seriously damaged our credibility with our allies. The last year has completely wrecked that credibility so that even if we do elect someone who tried to repair those relationships, there’s zero reason to trust that someone new won’t just come destroy it again on a whim in 4 years.
Right. It’s not only the person or the administration, the whole system was damaged
Of cowards.
They are about the same as the original guarantees Russia gave Ukraine when they gave up their nukes
The same US that is threatening to annex its current allies? They sure sound credible.
Canadian in me say , don't fall for this
Ask the Native Americans about that
If they sign it, Russia will just false flag and Trump will use that to not honour anything.
Don't give up any land. Fuck Russia. You cannot trust USA to provide security.
Having a "buffer zone" in the Donbas is much, much more reliable security guarantee against Russian invasion than giving up Donbas and relying on US and some "guarantees" on paper.
Honestly its more 'you can't trust anyone' on security guarantees. I agree the Trump administration is the worst offender, but pretty much any European with F-35 could end the war by joining on the Ukrainian side. We've seen the F-35 battle vs Russian Air defense battle before, and it's pretty one sided. It would absolutely move the needle, but war is always going to take bodies on the line too.
You just have to be willing to throw 50,000+ souls and quite a bit of treasure into the meat grinder. So far even the most generous European nations are nowhere even remotely close to that level of commitment. If they won't do it now, why would you think they would do it in the future? Legally binding is not a thing in geo-politics.
“At the same time, several European leaders have advised Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy not to rush into an agreement, particularly if it involves territorial concessions.”
Smart advice…
Just to be clear: We're talking about the same US that currently considers legalities a pesky hurdle to circumvent, lie their way through, or outright ignore, and reneges on contracts and agreements so regularly that it can be more trusted to break them than to adhere by them? The same US whose plans to corrode and undermine the EU just leaked? The very US that wants to cut and run from NATO?
That US offers "legally binding NATO guarantees"?
The admin that spent the last 10 months destroying the trust in NATO wants you to think they'd honor this.
I'm so fucking confused, every week a completely diametrically opposed position from the same administration
That's what they want you to think but you should focus on the trends. Since Trump took office there has been zero new support given to Ukraine.
I wouldn’t trust anything Trump says
It seems such a terrible act of self-sabotage by this US administration to so toxically destroy such a broad and strong alliance with Europe that the Americans have spent so much energy crafting for so long. There were plenty of ways to maintain that bond while pivoting in other directions. The public commentary here in Europe is pretty unanimous that the US is a country positioning itself as on its own, isolating itself, and the closest relationship the US President is forging is with Russia. What a shitshow. The relationship with Europe was to the benefit of the US, and the breakdown in trust spearheaded by this administration will have affected trade, tourism, education, as well as political and diplomatic partnerships.
USA is pivoting away from Europe, Canada, Latin America and into Russia and Middle East as partners. Trump has been leading that charge based on his prior relationships with them. Part of this is his pettiness to come back at all the countries and institutions that debanked him and denied him loans. Part of it is that he’s kind of right to abandon current trade relationships. As long as the Middle East is in his pocket he can basically rewrite the entire shape of the global economy because they’re on the same page and he doesn’t have to work with hostile European bureaucracies to effect the change he want. And the change he wants is all in self service and to the billionaire class.
The economic philosophy of Europe leans more socialist. Just look at the tax system. USA is hurtling towards late stage hyper capitalism. Unfettered free market where billionaires can do whatever they want and destroy anything that isn’t them including the worker class. In a different timeline heavy restrictions would have been placed on AI until transition plans and safety nets and hell UBI were on the table but that’s not our current reality. Our current reality in the USA is- either be a billionaire or get fucked, leave the USA. And maga is fully behind this.
Oh and leaving the USA won’t fix anything. The rest of the world will be forced to follow the USAs psychotic footsteps to stay relevant and to maintain their own sovereignty. So these changes will eventually impact the entire world where there will be a loosening of restrictions on institutions and businesses just to keep up with the USA. It’s a catastrophic race to an economic singularity where everyone outside of the .01% will barely be permitted to subsist. The squeeze we’re all feeling around the globe in our pocketbooks and our daily lives isn’t a bug it’s a feature.
Nothing will change until there’s a global revolt and that will never happen because the billionaire class is advancing AI and robotics to have their personal armies to protect them and keep their businesses moving. (And yes it sounds ridiculous to hear robot armies but we seem to be conducting wars mostly through drones these days anyway).
Bottom line is it’s always been and always will be about money and specifically money for the already rich. Nothing else matters. Look at musk he went on a multimillion dollar tear politically so he could establish more of a foothold in the White House- why? For philosophical reasons? Fuck no. He was the worlds biggest welfare queen and Biden refuses to continue enabling him so he took steps to ensure the mothers milk would always flow to him and his businesses. It always is and always has been only about the money.
Why would anyone believe anything that trump says?
It is beyond Trump though.
We can’t really trust the American nation anymore, as in, the people.
The part where the current administration is made of people who wouldn't keep a promise, and has undercut the United States by cancelling promises made by prior administrations, suggests that "legally binding" is a waste of everyone's time.
No nation or no person ever really manages perfect honesty, but the US has run so far away from even trying that you'd be a fool to trust this country now.
If I were Zelenskyy, I wouldn't trust any deal that didn't put several thousand Americans within 5 miles of whatever line of demarcation is established - and I wouldn't trust even that until the troops were already there.
Not worth the paper it's written on
It's the 'Whoa this is worthless' meme but IRL
Can't keep up with him. The guy flip flops more than a soccer player faking an injury.
Trump has repeatedly violated legally binding agreements without consequence, and we’re supposed to believe this one would be upheld if he didn’t feel like it? Sorry, but between our president, and a judicial system that has repeatedly shielded him from any legal issues, there is no deal that involves promising future action that is worth a damn. The presidential immunity case on its own makes ignoring treaties (which this already is weaker than, no chance in hell he goes through Congress) a completely valid action, as they’re “official duties.”
The US under Trump has completely shattered any idea that it will respect past commitments. Any country relying on them for future assurances is a fool.
Why would ANYONE believe ANYTHING president pedofile says....EVER?! He's a traitor to his own country. Why would he be trusted to protect someone else's?
In what sense? If the U.S. fails to live up to it, it’s not like Ukraine can take the U.S. to court and force the U.S. to defend Ukraine.
These are promises that are about as legally binding as the Budapest Memorandum. Which, as we’ve seen, are pretty much worthless
You kidding me? Article 5 is as vague as it gets and does not bind anyone legally. Budepest memorandum all over again.
Why would they trust the US, they already had security guaranties
It's guaranteed they`ll stab them in the back if convenient......
Feels real empty given trumps history
NATO ”style”? Why not have them in NATO, then?
Also, they would be worth more than many other members anyway.
Don't trust Trump!
Legally binding means nothing when your president is a law breaking dictator. Also Putin will now reject this deal because he wants to conquer it all.
A Trump promise.
Worth its weight in memecoin.
Any promise from this administration is about as worthless as a disposable baby wipe.
You mean like when we offered them security from Russia when we help them dismantle their nuclear weapons?
[deleted]
This didn't actually promise they would do anything if someone breaks it. Half the reason France never signed was that it wasn't worth anything.
maybe read it first.
the only time the US (or the other signees) ever promised to help Ukraine is if Ukraine is threatened, or actually a victim, of a nuke strike.
Considering how little regard the trump administration has for NATO and its members, that means nothing.
Never gonna happen under Trump
The US confuses the fuck out of me.
It's as if the US executive branch has no idea what it's doing, just flailing around based on the day to day whims of a 'president' in mental decline.
Didn’t Ukraine have guarantees if they gave up their Nukes?
Oh…
The orange felon is ready to dump any legally binding agreement, if you so much as look at one of his cheeseburgers wrong.
What in the bipolar fuck is this? One day it’s give them everything to win. Then it’s give Russia land. Then it’s remove us from NATO. Then it’s keep us in NATO but thy get none of our cash or guns. Now it’s they get article 5 protection?!
What. The. Actual. Fuck.
A man with no respect for the law and considers the concept of "legally binding" to be an inconvenience he can sidestep, isn't offering any guarantees. Anything offer from Trump or Putin isn't worth the paper on which it's printed.
Legally binding international treaties fo not exist.
“We want to provide Ukrainians with security guarantees that, on the one hand, are not hollow…”
You mean like the 1994 Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances, signed by Ukraine, Russia, the U.S., and the UK, where Ukraine gave up its Soviet-era nuclear weapons in exchange for security assurances, including respect for its sovereignty, independence, and borders?
Yeah. I would trust nothing that comes out of this regime.
Haha, best joke of 2025: USA guarantees
He's pulling from NATO. So much for that Article V. Why would the new "Article V-style" be any better? Once you lose any credibility, it's gone forever.
Trump will wipe his ass with those security guarantees - did everyone not see them collude with Russia to write the latest “peace” plan?
Wait til tomorrow
We already offered that 30 years ago and they accepted in exchange for surrendering their nuclear weapons stocks.
... Isn't the US busily removing themselves from NATO? And how long ago was it that they were talking about a 'peace' with Putin that would involve Ukraine basically surrendering everything Russia even touched during this invasion? A month?
Trump is lying. Don’t do it Ukraine. You already got burned once when you agreed to give your nukes to Russia for US security guarantees. Trump is desperate to do Putin’s bidding; Trump would love to do it with a simple lie since that is how he’s solved all of his previous problems. They only reason he follows through on some things he says, are for things of little consequence so he can tell his detractors, “see, look, I wasn’t lying and you have TDS.”
Yeah, as though Trump would stand behind his word given he never has before.
Not worth the paper the US wipes it on.
Just like every Bison dollar, US promises aren't worth the paper they are printed on any more.
Promises from Donald Trump aren't worth the paper they're printed on.
US ready to offer what they can’t reliably provide, for concessions Ukraine would never in a million years make, in a repeat of promises in exchange for giving up real world means of self defense.
This is not happening anywhere outside of rhetoric, for many, many reasons.
This is absolutely meaningless coming from the US. And regardless, Trump will just yank back the offer next week when he decides to kiss Putin's ass again for whatever reason.
U.S. words are wind
Oh, you mean like in 2014?
Nobody should trust Trump on ANYTHING. (Except that he will always do what is in HIS best interest).
You mean- the same Article 5 Guarantees that the administration has publicly claimed they won’t follow through on? Yeah— so they are basically promising to not enforce security. Got it.
"trust me bro" - Ukrainians, please remember Budapest memorandum. Americans are a joke.
Didn’t Russia, Ukraine and the USA sign an agreement in the 90s? Something about Urkraine being guaranteed security and sovereignty if they give up their nuclear weapons.
How is that agreement holding?
Nothing was guaranteed in it, might want to actually read it, it's not that long.
you are wrong. just read them.
Budapest Memorandum
Article 5
It says nothing about defending them.
Don't trust USA
Read the actual Article 5. The phrasing is piss-weak ("such action as it deems necessary") and doesn't really carry that many obligations.
The true value of NATO has always been the informal agreement that the US and Europe stand together as "the West" and would defend each other with military means, with Article 5 merely as the framework for that promise.
Handing out an equivalent text means nothing if the US isn't committed to seeing Ukraine (or Europe, for that matter...) as belonging to a common sphere of nations, which Trump is clearly not. Transactional politics is incompatible with a functional NATO.
US guarantees aren't what they uaed to be.
He lies, dont believe him.
There are no guarantees with this administration
Either it's Nato Article 5 because Ukraine joins or whatever Trump says is fully meaningless.
the same as in Munich 1994?
US and guarantees doesn’t fit into the same sentence under Trump. They can’t be trusted anymore.
Shit Trump and his cronies are so fucked in the head they make it impossible to deal with
This is a good laugh. There is nothing “legally binding” for this administration. Zelenskyy would be a fool to trust anything Trump says.
Dear Ukraine, Don't trust anything coming out of the Trump administration.
Fuck Trump!!
Do Not Trust USA!!!!!!!
Legally binding? The fuck does that mean right now to US? US can't be trusted with anything anymore.
Why in the world would any country trust the US to follow promises?
Was this offer given from the felon and his staff from Washington DC?
Something makes me think they are less than trustworthy.
Do. Not. Trust. Trump.
Fake!
Any and all promises from this administration are worthless. Don't fall for it Ukraine.
Nothing the US promises is valid anymore. Nothing,
That is another Budapest memorandum, I hope Ukrainians learned their lesson.
Trump didn’t keep the trade agreements with Mexico and Canada that HE made, why would anyone on earth think he would keep this agreement? He cheated on three wives. He went bankrupt instead of honoring his agreements to payback creditors. The man is incapable of honoring anything he signs.
Like the Budapest memorandum?
It's a scam. Nato troops in Ukraine and NATO membership is the only thing close to actual guarantees that makes sense.
US willing to offer Budapest style memorandum /s
Trump cannot be trusted to honor any agreement.
The US can’t even follow the law and hold its felon leaders accountable, if you think they will honor a protection clause I have some watches and bibles to sell you.
You'd have to be a special kind of stupid to believe anything the US says right now.
Yeah, just as binding as the agreement Russia made when Ukraine turned over their nukes. What a joke.
Remember what Ukraine was supposed to get if they gave up their nukes? Pepperidge Farm remembers
My word is my guarantee and I have the biggest and greatest guarantees,
Trump and his regime lies dozens of times every day. This is just one more.
This administration can’t be trusted.
“We won’t really help you right now while you’re literally being attacked. But just give up everything then we’ll totally protect you next time, trust me bro”
DO NOT TRUST THE UNITED STATES!!!
Like the last legally binding guarantees made? And the recent promise to piss all over any previous agreements made with anyone and anything?
Can America be trusted with anything at this point?
Are you talking about the Budapest Memorandum here?
Well no, the Budapest Memorandum doesn't do that.
'Legally binding' doesn't seem to have much value 7nder the current administration
Anything from this current administration is complete bullshit
How is it going to be enforced legally tho to make sure it is upheld.
I wont believe until I see it