Wait,
Basically giving up the Crimea in exchange a vague promise that Putin wouldn't invade the baltic states is a good deal for you?
Well, I haven't actually said that it was a good deal but I think that this is much better than the situation that we were facing before negotiations. We have to realize that, although it was far from perfect, it still guaranteed many important benefits for the whole Eastern Europe. We got more than 50 billion from Russia to a new Development Fund for Ukraine and we also were able to get a Renunciation of all Russian Claims over Europe.
I truly believe that we should have discussed a little bit more and in a more detailed fashion about the Ukrainian-Atlasian-Russian arrangement over Crimea. I would have certainly preferred if the First Crimean Independence Referendum was considered null and void and a new Referendum over Autonomy, as considered in the Peace Deal, was prepared with tough United Nations Supervision and cooperation between Ukranians and Russians. The only problem is that the great part of negotiations between Russia and Atlasia were made in private conversations, so I'm not fully informed over how the meetings proceeded and which were the limits of the Russian Delegation.
Nonetheless, now that the deal is already in process, I fear that any kind of profound change in the agreement can bring terrible instability and I'm not willing to be the responsible for the destruction of Potus' legacy nor to be tagged by the International Community as an unreliable negotiator. I can certainly try to start new dialogues with the Russian Federation but I can't (unfortunately to your expectations) break that deal that demanded serious efforts from the Atlasian Diplomacy, Mr. Windjammer.
Well,
I believe the deal was a terrible mistake. But yes, I understand that you cannot break the deal.
I will vote to confirm the nominee.
