RT @ChristopherJM: Russian FM Lavrov makes clear that there’s no Putin-Zelensky bilateral meeting planned nor is one happening anytime soon….

RT @RANDCorporation: "If Russia is offering what it offered in 2022, it’s hard to see how we’ve moved," @scharap told @nytimes. "It does no….

an agreement that no Western troops will be deployed on the ground in Ukraine as part of a peacekeeping force, the sources said." We don't have to agree with these positions, but we need to understand them. 3/3 Source:

"Putin is sticking . to his previous demands that Ukraine give up its NATO ambitions and for a legally binding pledge from the U.S.-led military alliance that it will not expand further eastwards, as well as for limits on the Ukrainian army and . 2/3.

This is one of the more sensible ideas floated in recent days… it’s definitely not “article 5 like” but it’s something.

their respective countries are in the lead, details will be missed and nuance lost. Remember, it took over 500 meetings and over two years to agree the Korean Armistice. 3/3.

and into the weeds, there aren't going to be any bridging of positions or substantive compromise, let alone "breakthroughs." Those negotiations take a lot of time and effort even when the people leading them have nothing else to do. When people who also should be running 2/3.

When you have episodic principal- or leader-level engagement instead of regular, working-level talks, you end up with misunderstandings like what we see unfolding with security guarantees right now. It's highly unlikely that until these negotiations get out of the headlines 1/3.

Security commitments can exist without a physical presence — e.g., Norway. And you can have a physical presence without a formal security commitment — e.g., Qatar. But first order questions need to be answered before operational planning gets ahead of policy. 2/2.

Amazing how we’ve come full circle on this idea. What problem is a brigade of European forces far from the front trying to solve? It’s certainly not going to deter Russia. Without a formal commitment to Ukraine’s security, its mission will remain unclear. 1/2.

Or more alive than ever?.

other security guarantee models are discussed in this (still relevant) piece with @JyShapiro

I would say that is the most important element of Ukraine's future security is a strong Ukrainian army. There can be other external commitments to Ukraine's security, but "Article 5-like" is not a likely one of them. See

RT @rochowanski: Words to be written in stone.

Security guarantees come in lots of shapes and sizes. But let’s be clear: there’s not going to be a US or European commitment to go to war with Russia if it reinvades Ukraine. I’m all for commitments to back a ceasefire. But this conversation is becoming divorced from reality.

RT @rochowanski: I don't know why I bother writing earnest articles about people-centered peacemaking or the proper sequencing of negotiati….

A reminder that article 5-like guarantees were part of the 2022 Istanbul communique. ⁦@DrRadchenko⁩

RT @rochowanski: Aaaaand another take that assumes European troops would enforce a ceasefire despite Russia only agreeing on condition of n….

RT @asliaydintasbas: Didn’t we already know this in Istanbul? Sam is right and am surprised that the media/Trump was even expecting somethi….

RT @schroeder_prs: @shashj @scharap Putin has not been sensitive to the West’s cost imposition strategy on Ukraine, so no prospect that it….