“Merely trying to place ukraine in the best position for negotiations is like having a limp dick. Instead we must bravely conquer our selfish fears of the world being depopulated through nuclear exchange to aid the ukrainian ppl in the total demoralisation of Russia at all costs”
Also accusing comparatively less hawkish sloganeering of being overly vague in its ambitions is frankly hypocritical: cohen specifically clarifies what precise policies he’s not necessarily saying he supports (like a literal march on Moscow) while describing his positive aims of demoralisation of the Russian leaderships imperial hopes in consistently fuzzy terms and loose analogies. The problem isn’t the fogginess, it’s that it is fogginess potentially giving cover for deescalation in place of indefinite raising of the stakes
“We must make sure that Putin gets at least some benefits from doing this or he won’t do it again, and that would be terrible,” say people who might actually think of themselves as being opposed to genocide and/or nuclear annihilation but seem to favor actions that make those things more likely to happen.
It’s not complicated: If this results in anything other than negative consequences with literally zero benefit for Putin, then Putin and/or his successors will keep doing it. Do you want them to keep invading countries, or not?
It’s the same logic for rich tax cheats: should the fine for getting caught doing the crime be less, equal, or more than the profit from doing the crime? If it’s “less” or “equal” that means they keep doing it every day forever.
putin has enough egg on his face to deter future russian aggression for about a century. even if he captured the donbas (or more!), he has still expended vast reserves of domestic good will, seen previously ambivalent neighbours join nato, suffered great economic and military losses, and generally made a buffoon of himself on the world stage. this more than compensates for whatever concessions might conceivably be made in negotiations
on the other hand, if we are worried about putins incentives wrt persisting in his military aggression, a failure to offer any off ramp is certain to cause him to dig in his heels to avoid the cataclysmic loss of face that is complete and unambiguous failure before the world and before his citizenry. unless you are asking for complete surrender even unto regime change (which, with a nuclear power against another, is sheer lunacy), you are going to have to make some concessions at some point in the negotiations. or is this a matter of "Better Dead than Red ~Autocratic~"?
Putin having egg on his face seems significant to people on Tumblr. Putin isn’t on Tumblr, and gives zero shits about your memes. He lives out there in the real world, and out there only real-world stuff matters.
If Putin keeps an inch of Ukrainian territory that means this whole thing got him some benefits, which means he does it again the next time he’s bored or hungry. He’s already got plenty of off-ramps, and giving him some kind of bribe to stop killing people just means he learns (again) that killing people gets him free stuff.
Negotiations are a fantasy; this only happened in the first place because Putin gives zero shits about things like treaties. “Oh but we’re sure he won’t break deals again, even though he got material gains from doing so last time” is the dumbest take of 2022, and probably the dumbest take of 2023.
If I punch you in the face and demand your lunch money, giving me half your lunch money is not a win for you and will increase the amount of punching that’s in your future. Literally everyone knows that, so for everyone who’s pretending not to, it’s time to ask why it’s important to you that Putin get some kind of benefit from invading Ukraine.
Firstly, let's all calm down. We aren't enemies here, we are intellectuals of good intent; using the Socratic Method to find the best solution.
Now, that said, I don't think the ideas OP raised about "public good will" really matter. Embarrassment is not an issue for autocrats. He doesn't need popular support, he just needs his generals and police chiefs to obey him.
I see two practical "off-ramps".
One: Putin is allowed to withdraw all military assets to within internationally recognised borders, I.E, get out of the Donbas and Crimea. In exchange, he must formally apologise, and one of his daughters will live as a guest/hostage in Kiev, under Zelensky's supervision (think "Theon Greyjoy"). There will be no prosecution for any but the most severe Russian war crimes.
Two: we quietly make contact with a Russian General, Industrialist, or Bureacrat; and agree that if the Russians withdraw and Vladimir Putin is removed, normal trade will be resumed and the whole thing would be blamed on him. Putin will then either "mysteriosly vanish", "commit suicide via bullet to the back of his own skull", or "conveniently show up bound and gagged at the door to Interpol HQ". After his (potentially posthumous) trial at the Hague, normal trade relations with Russia will resume.
Letting him get away with it, or punishing him with consequences that don't matter to an autocrat aren't solutions, though. A price must be paid.
