Ask HN: Can't Ukraine lease/sell border land to EU temporarily | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: Can't Ukraine lease/sell border land to EU temporarily

12 pointstemplarchamp29 comments

Why can't Ukraine sell, say 5 KM of land along border to EU for a $ with an option to buy back at 100% premium? No Russian tanks/aircraft can fly thereby protecting. Instead of Ukraine joining NATO NATO can play this credible gimmmick, just like Russia played a gimmmick by declaring independence.

View on HN

Because if a EU country wanted to actually defend Ukraine, they'd just do it. They don't need to play that sort of ridiculous game. They can literally go in there with military assistance and start shooting.

That they aren't doing that, means they don't actually have the will to defend Ukraine against Russia. Ukraine trying to play a little land border game isn't going to change that reality.

> That they aren't doing that, means they don't actually have the will to defend Ukraine against Russia

This is an oversimplification. They are willing to. However there is a hug step from offering economic support to sending your own troops on the field.

I'm not sure that's the play. They don't need land, they need balls (i.e. if the Russians continue then fundamentally detach them from the modern world).

On a tactical level they probably already have more than enough breathing room to be able to mobilize (which I would imagine the US has already done) every information gathering asset in the region to provide Intel to the Ukrainian troops. As far as I'm aware there are already publicly documented AWACS aircraft on patrol as you'd expect.

I have family by a few RAF bases with some saucy planes but it would be foolish to comment on it in a time like this so gossip will stay as such.

I am not saying from defensive posture -but from a posture to prevent further escalation and aggression. Russia is able to do what it does is simply because it thinks it can get away with it. It is not fair - so ring fencing at the cheapest cost to force NATO to trigger Article V will give pause. will Russia cross the red line?

> will Russia cross the red line?

Who knows ? And, furthermore, who will take the bet ?

Trump would be the closest to do that, just look at the rhetoric from the North Korea crisis in 2017:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2017%E2%80%932018_North_Kore...

That makes more sense although I am still skeptical, i.e. the moment the line is crossed possibly by chance you then have an emboldened enemy.

So then if Russia continues to invade Ukraine anyway, what is the EU going to do?

Is it going to fight Russia?

That leads to nuclear war.

what is EU going to do if Russia invades Poland anyway? Thermonuclear war? Are you saying the whole security apparatus and international institutions are all bluff? If so, Russia would have figured out the bluff by now.

Nuclear deterrence doesn't mean that France would retaliate with nuclear weapons to a conventional attack, but that French nuclear weapons make it unlikely, not worth it, for Russia to use its own weapons first.

Russia passed a law to use nukes for conventional attack even on foreign soil...

That law doesn’t prevent ~200 Russian cities from being evaporated by the French nuclear arsenal, and neither world it prevent France from responding to a nuclear attack with said arsenal.

That, not law, is the important part of MAD.

I don’t claim to know the right solution to any difficulties in international politics, but I can say the difference between the current situation and your hypothetical is that Poland is in the EU so Article 42.7 of the Lisbon treaty world apply, and is also in NATO so Article 5 of the NATO treaty would apply too.

https://www.europarl.europa.eu/meetdocs/2009_2014/documents/...

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_110496.htm

If you accept that MAD only goes one way because one side doesn't care why can't that side conquer and rule the entire world after all for each nation the others nations plight is less than existential so they ought by that reckoning accept each nations plight until it is their turn.

Even when invaded being conquered represents a lesser loss than being blown up so one would logically either preemptively accept defeat or at least withhold your nukes while the enemy grinds you down using traditional means.

It would seem vastly more rational to work together to destroy the aggressor. If you really think current leadership will nuke you rather than be defeated then remove that leadership and see if the next leadership feels the same way.

Will we allow Putin to murder Ukraine, then Finland, then Sweden, then what? How many other lives is one mans life worth?

Why don't struggling parents simply sell some of their children to raise money!

Do you have any other ideas? We need moar

You can call it conspiracy theory but I believe that US/Russia and many other countries gonna benefit out of it by selling arms as most countries started increase their defence budget.

I think while Russia thinks creatively, the other side thinks linearly. Spain, UK, France or Poland should buy the land and poke a finger at the aggressor - just a thought.

Are any of them itching to enter a land war with Russia?

It looks like they don't, otherwise they would have deployed forces in Ukraine before the invasion forcing Russia to attack them first.

(And that's something we may regret, because I don't think Russia was willing to have a land war with a bunch of European armed forces either)

I don't understand how Russia is thinking creatively here. If Ukraine resistance keeps up there's no way Russia has the will or money to maintain an occupation. What has been gained in this invasion?

Europe has been woken up to it's need to spend more on defense.

Ukrainians have been hardened against Russia.

NATO was given a chance to show it's worth

Short answer: that's not how borders work.

not the border, i mean arbitrary land, say 50 miles, along the border.

For a simple sale/loan the land would remain Ukrainean.

Just like if an American buys a house in Russia, it won't mean now that USA can militarily defend it.

Every piece of land has actually two owners: the sovereign nation and the civilian/company "owning it" as understood in regular speech.

You are confusing an individual from a sovereign state. If a state buys it, it belongs to the state where the constitution protections are enforced.

Yeah, 2 owners like Guantanamo? Ukraine can relinquish control for a known time, even a year. Russia would dare not start war by crossing another country. If there is no will to defend, there is no solution.

it worked for hong kong, guantanamo etc. Sell the whole Ukraine for a $ to be redeemed on par in future. Russia will halt all crap in 0.001 seconds.

One Weird Trick / Dictators Hate Him!

C'mon man, do you actually think that this will work?

Because the EU wouldn’t want to buy it?

Like Denis Leary says: because they've got the bomb.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com