US President-elect Donald Trump has campaigned on a promise to end America's involvement in wars.

Summary

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned that Ukraine would lose the war if the U.S., its primary military supporter, cuts funding.

Speaking to Fox News, he stressed the importance of unity between the U.S. and Ukraine as Russia accelerates its territorial gains.

Zelensky acknowledged Ukraine’s challenges on the battlefield, despite new U.S. weapon supplies, including long-range missiles and anti-personnel land mines.

He criticized German Chancellor Olaf Scholz for engaging with Putin, calling it a risky move.

Trump has pledged to end the war quickly but offered no specifics.

  • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
    22·
    3 days ago

    Well, if it violates the Budapest memorandum of 1994, of course Trump will change his mind. /s

    That aside, it only would kick in if Russia used nuclear weapons, anyway. Link to the text. The present effort is all about trying to keep Europe safe through deterrence, and to a lesser degree supporting a democracy that’s under attack.

    • whotookkarl@lemmy.worldEnglish
      6·
      3 days ago

      The US may yet betray Ukraine and break its agreement under the treaty, I hope not but I don’t expect anything else from Putin’s #1 sycophant.

      1. The Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, and The United States of America reaffirm their commitment to Ukraine, in accordance with the principles of the CSCE Final Act, to respect the independence and sovereignty and the existing borders of Ukraine.

      CSCE final act, not exclusive to using nuclear weapons: https://en.m.wikisource.org/wiki/Final_Act_of_the_Conference_on_Security_and_Cooperation_in_Europe

      • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
        5·
        3 days ago

        Yeah, Russia definitely broke their word here. I just don’t see anything that says the US has to intervene.

        • whotookkarl@lemmy.worldEnglish
          4·
          3 days ago

          If I sign a treaty that says if someone really fucks you up me and my friends will definitely come help, and one of my friends that signed it comes by and keeps fucking with you because you don’t have the things you gave up in the treaty, then I think there’s a pretty large responsibility on me and the rest of my friends to come help. I think it would be a dick move to help awhile then walk away.

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            2·
            3 days ago

            It doesn’t say the signatories will help, though, it just says they won’t hurt. To “respect” is a passive activity.

            Is there something more specific in CSCE?

        • UltraGiGaGigantic@lemmy.mlEnglish
          1·
          3 days ago

          While true, this shit is 10,000% lawyer speak and weasel words. Every country is going to make nukes because guess what… they always needed them to protect their sovereignty.

          No more fooling non nuclear powers that there is any “order” in this world. Just the strong crushing the weak.

          Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was Same as it ever was

          Now playing Talking Heads - Once in a lifetime

          • CanadaPlus@lemmy.sdf.orgEnglish
            4·
            3 days ago

            I don’t think there’s any weaseling here. Clinton wasn’t about to start a nuclear war over Ukraine, and very deliberately didn’t enter a treaty that said that. Diplomats are famous for arguing endlessly over exact choice of words, even.

            Nobody ever claimed international law was strong and inviolable.