Moscow halts grain deal in what UN calls a global blow to people in need(reuters.com)
reuters.com
Moscow halts grain deal in what UN calls a global blow to people in need
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/crimea-bridge-key-russian-supply-line-damaged-two-dead-reports-blasts-2023-07-17/
11 comments
To answer your question with a question: why did Putin agree to this in the first place? And what as changed?
The main reason is to keep this local. Grain shipments feed a lot of poor people, and ending them turns into a humanitarian crisis very quickly. That can bring in even more pressure from places that are otherwise neutral about this war.
But it doesn't matter if he loses. So that humanitarian gesture gets thrown out when there is a way to say "But they did it first". It doesn't really matter all that much how reasonable that is. It's all a big, poorly-defined mess of who is willing to tolerate what, and what pressure they can bring to bear.
Ukraine surely knew that this would happen at some point. At most, it matters when they can force the issue. Putin can halt the deal, but that just puts shipping back into jeopardy. If they've degraded Russia's forces and can defend their shipping well enough, they don't care whether Putin abides by that deal or not.
They may or may not have judged that correctly. War is always a matter of taking your best guess, and then adapting when you find out the reality on the ground.
The main reason is to keep this local. Grain shipments feed a lot of poor people, and ending them turns into a humanitarian crisis very quickly. That can bring in even more pressure from places that are otherwise neutral about this war.
But it doesn't matter if he loses. So that humanitarian gesture gets thrown out when there is a way to say "But they did it first". It doesn't really matter all that much how reasonable that is. It's all a big, poorly-defined mess of who is willing to tolerate what, and what pressure they can bring to bear.
Ukraine surely knew that this would happen at some point. At most, it matters when they can force the issue. Putin can halt the deal, but that just puts shipping back into jeopardy. If they've degraded Russia's forces and can defend their shipping well enough, they don't care whether Putin abides by that deal or not.
They may or may not have judged that correctly. War is always a matter of taking your best guess, and then adapting when you find out the reality on the ground.
I don't think anyone expects much of Putin other than acts of a tyrant, but it should be pointed out that one was a military target and the other feeds the poor.
I'm not disputing that, but you can't blow up someone's bridges and expect them to want to play nice. It's not realistic.
"Military target" is a curious phrase given that this seems to be civilian infrastructure (of course it's probably important for the military as well). Pre-war, looks like the bridge saw around 15k in daily traffic. https://www.zr.ru/content/news/920305-8-millionov-avtomobili...
So the real question is, why is Ukraine attacking civilian infrastructure? Is that not terrorism? And an even better question is, why is the West helping them do this?
So the real question is, why is Ukraine attacking civilian infrastructure? Is that not terrorism? And an even better question is, why is the West helping them do this?
> "Military target" is a curious phrase given that this seems to be civilian infrastructure (of course it's probably important for the military as well). Pre-war, looks like the bridge saw around 15k in daily traffic. https://www.zr.ru/content/news/920305-8-millionov-avtomobili...
It’s a valid military target because Russia uses it to resupply its military in Crimea.
If Russia doesn’t want people targeting their bridges as military targets perhaps the military shouldn’t use them.
> So the real question is, why is Ukraine attacking civilian infrastructure?
Because it’s a military target being used by the Russian military to resupply Crimea and also the forces in the land corridor nearby.
> Is that not terrorism?.
Nope
> And an even better question is, why is the West helping them do this?
Because kicking Russia out of Crimea is something that needs to happen.
It’s a valid military target because Russia uses it to resupply its military in Crimea.
If Russia doesn’t want people targeting their bridges as military targets perhaps the military shouldn’t use them.
> So the real question is, why is Ukraine attacking civilian infrastructure?
Because it’s a military target being used by the Russian military to resupply Crimea and also the forces in the land corridor nearby.
> Is that not terrorism?.
Nope
> And an even better question is, why is the West helping them do this?
Because kicking Russia out of Crimea is something that needs to happen.
Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. ~98% Nearly a decade ago now. This is ancient history. Crimea is not in the Ukraine.
Are you suggesting to forcibly overrule that?
It sounds like Russophobia is leading you to come to some seriously flawed logical conclusions.
I also love how you completely ignored the fact that the Crimean bridge is in fact civilian infrastructure used by thousands daily.
Are you suggesting to forcibly overrule that?
It sounds like Russophobia is leading you to come to some seriously flawed logical conclusions.
I also love how you completely ignored the fact that the Crimean bridge is in fact civilian infrastructure used by thousands daily.
You have to admit 98% sounds just a tad suspicious
>> Crimea voted overwhelmingly to join Russia. ~98% Nearly a decade ago now. This is ancient history. Crimea is not in the Ukraine.
Crimea is Ukraine. Nobody recognizes the sham referendum held under foreign military occupation. With 100 votes against 11, the General Assembly of the United Nations declared it illegitimate.
Crimea is Ukraine. Nobody recognizes the sham referendum held under foreign military occupation. With 100 votes against 11, the General Assembly of the United Nations declared it illegitimate.
The bridge is clearly military infrastructure (and bringing it down will have significant military impact). Just not exclusively so.
Why is the West helping them do this?
To bring an end to this insanity. As soon as humanely possible.
Why is the West helping them do this?
To bring an end to this insanity. As soon as humanely possible.
It's a terrible situation, but what exactly do you expect the Russians to do in response to something like that?