They are still trying the ceasefire BEFORE negotiations gambit. Just because it worked in 1918, does not mean it will work now. It was an illusion. Everyone was exhausted and they had run out of money and racked multiple economies into monstrous debt. Actually, the ceasefire did not come before negotiations then either, come to think of it. The concept of Ceasefire-before-negotiation is just a distortion via pop-history.
What can happen after such a demand is an impossible-to-reach goal - it is a deep state safety-net whereby they can pretend to want to reach lofty goals and their respective audiences can be satisfied that their esteemed, appointed representatives are doing everything they can.
That's because ceasefires are so easily broken (and then talks have to halt. LOL).
Thing is, Ceasefires are habitually broken [cites mulitple 2026 real-time examples], so there is no point in even demanding it, except for us decoders, because we know that breaking ceasefires causes disruptions to negotiations. (See whaddImean?) And, there is always someone who wants to break it.
So, the Russians will say that one can negotiate without a ceasefire. If you can't do that in a third-party 'neutral' country, then what kind of chicken are you? Shaddap you in the back row. Actually, go ahead. FAFO
They are still trying the ceasefire BEFORE negotiations gambit. Just because it worked in 1918, does not mean it will work now. It was an illusion. Everyone was exhausted and they had run out of money and racked multiple economies into monstrous debt. Actually, the ceasefire did not come before negotiations then either, come to think of it. The concept of Ceasefire-before-negotiation is just a distortion via pop-history.
What can happen after such a demand is an impossible-to-reach goal - it is a deep state safety-net whereby they can pretend to want to reach lofty goals and their respective audiences can be satisfied that their esteemed, appointed representatives are doing everything they can.
That's because ceasefires are so easily broken (and then talks have to halt. LOL). Thing is, Ceasefires are habitually broken [cites mulitple 2026 real-time examples], so there is no point in even demanding it, except for us decoders, because we know that breaking ceasefires causes disruptions to negotiations. (See whaddImean?) And, there is always someone who wants to break it.
So, the Russians will say that one can negotiate without a ceasefire. If you can't do that in a third-party 'neutral' country, then what kind of chicken are you? Shaddap you in the back row. Actually, go ahead. FAFO
Get over it.