Russia's economy is 'imploding' on export decline, economists claim

[pooya87]

It's always interesting to see these old topics and the statements everyone including yourself made and how much of it was right and how much was wrong. Like the "Russian economy imploding" or the "F-16 being sent to Ukraine", neither of which happened to this day!

Two years after the discussions in the topic was made, Russia is still standing, probably it still has the resources to continue its war against Ukraine for longer, BUT what would be the cost after the war? Will it be the same as what the history books tell us with the Soviet Union? The United States probably has made a controlled move to keep sending resources to Ukraine and continue draining Russia slowly.

The difference between this war and the last one is that here US is also paying a dire price, and Europe (US main and soon only remaining ally) is paying an even heavier price. In other words prolonging the war would hurt them as well as Russia.

As for Russian economy, I have to say they've managed to control the situation and grow over the past 2 years very well. However there are serious issues that I see:
One of the reasons why Russian economy grew was because they expanded their military industries and are now producing much larger number of weapons. That means a lot of people went to these new jobs and that is good at first sight because that's increased employment and people are making money. However, this is still not jobs that would help the society and the country in the long run.
In other words that's not exactly a healthy economy even though there is a nice GDP growth.

I can say the same criticism about US economy as well. A lot of it is coming from "arms dealers" that are increasing their production similar to Russians to feed the wars US regime starts. That's an even bigger and more expensive industry compared to the Russian's and it's just as unhealthy.

[Argoo]

Two years after the discussions in the topic was made, Russia is still standing, probably it still has the resources to continue its war against Ukraine for longer, BUT what would be the cost after the war? Will it be the same as what the history books tell us with the Soviet Union? The United States probably has made a controlled move to keep sending resources to Ukraine and continue draining Russia slowly.

The difference between this war and the last one is that here US is also paying a dire price, and Europe (US main and soon only remaining ally) is paying an even heavier price. In other words prolonging the war would hurt them as well as Russia.

If you look at it, the United States is spending very little effort and money in the Russian war against Ukraine, helping Ukraine now, compared to the assistance that the United States provided to the USSR in the war against Nazi Germany. Moreover, the majority of the funds that the United States allocates to help Ukraine - at least 60% - remain in America itself. They are being spent in particular on weapons production, which has already led to the greatest expansion of the American defense industry in several decades. Thus, from February 2022 to December 2023, the United States allocated at least $44 billion exclusively for military assistance to Ukraine - without taking into account other components of support for Kyiv. According to the Pentagon, $27 billion (that is, more than 61% of the amount) remained in the United States and was distributed among major American arms suppliers and manufacturers in 37 of the 50 US states.
https://nv.ua/world/countries/novoe-oruzhie-baydena-dlya-ukrainy-pochemu-dve-treti-pomoshchi-ostayutsya-v-ssha-novosti-ukrainy-50372533.html

By allocating only a few percent of its GDP to Ukraine, the United States, through the hands of Ukrainians, significantly weakens its potential enemy without directly fighting with it, without losing its soldiers on the battlefield and without the destruction of its military and civilian infrastructure accompanying the war. Russia, on the contrary, is suffering colossal losses in all directions and will emerge from this war, which it itself started, significantly weakened and set back many decades in economic terms.

[pooya87]

Congratulations on receiving the first tiny batch of F-16 fighters. So how many were in it? 6? 12? Did they make any difference or was I correct when months ago I said it is too little too late and it won't have any meaningful impact on the result of this conflict?

BTW can you translate the text on this video screenshot circulating social media in past days? They're claiming it shows the first F-16 that got shot down with a surface to air missile.

[DrBeer]

Congratulations on receiving the first tiny batch of F-16 fighters. So how many were in it? 6? 12? Did they make any difference or was I correct when months ago I said it is too little too late and it won't have any meaningful impact on the result of this conflict?

BTW can you translate the text on this video screenshot circulating social media in past days? They're claiming it shows the first F-16 that got shot down with a surface to air missile.

Typical, pathetic Kremlin propaganda for idiots
Yesterday:
1. TU-22 “fell”
2. Su-57 was shot down, the account was opened

These facts can be verified, but your photo..... Isn't that a Su-57 shot down by an F-16? Russian propaganda is very fond of passing off other people's photos/videos where it is not clear what is going on as “their successes”.
You by the way are a perfect confirmation of who is targeted by such propaganda
Can you here, in front of everyone, by this photo prove that it is an F-16 ?

[pooya87]

Can you here, in front of everyone, by this photo prove that it is an F-16 ?

I didn't make the claim to be the one proving it. I just asked someone who reads the language to translate what it says.

Whether an F-16 was shot down or not was not even the discussion. If you had followed our F-16 dialogs in this topic you would have known what the discussion was about.
And if you had read any other part of my comment that you quoted other than just the last line you would have noticed another question which you have no answer for: did the handful of F-16s make any meaningful difference?

[DrBeer]

Can you here, in front of everyone, by this photo prove that it is an F-16 ?

I didn't make the claim to be the one proving it. I just asked someone who reads the language to translate what it says.

Whether an F-16 was shot down or not was not even the discussion. If you had followed our F-16 dialogs in this topic you would have known what the discussion was about.
And if you had read any other part of my comment that you quoted other than just the last line you would have noticed another question which you have no answer for: did the handful of F-16s make any meaningful difference?

pooya87  You are in your style, nothing changes 
Is that your phrase ?
“Congratulations on receiving the first tiny batch of F-16 fighters. So how many were in it? 6? 12? Did they make any difference or was I correct when months ago I said it is too little too late and it won't have any meaningful impact on the result of this conflict?

BTW can you translate the text on this video screenshot circulating social media in past days? They're claiming it shows the first F-16 that got shot down with a surface to air missile.”

Yours !

Did you talk about shooting down an F-16 here? I did!

But let's get back to reality - after the appearance of F-16s in the sky, the shelling of peaceful Ukrainian cities and their peaceful neighborhoods by Russian aviation using powerful low-accuracy bombs FAB-500 and more powerful ones decreased 5 times. But the destruction by air-to-ground missiles of columns of terrorist Russian troops rushing with punitive operations into the Kursk People's Republic has begun.  It's all “obsolete and not a threat to the world's second army, the F-16”

But back to the economy of the terrorist country

Can you voice here at least one example of positive changes, or a branch of the economy of the terrorist country, where there is no decline, stagnation and problems ?

Don't tell me about GDP, because GDP of Russia now takes into account 50% of state budget expenditures on war, which in days or weeks turn into dutsm or burnt iron, and gives nothing to the real economy.

[pooya87]

But the destruction by air-to-ground missiles of columns of terrorist Russian troops rushing with punitive operations into the Kursk People's Republic has begun.  It's all “obsolete and not a threat to the world's second army, the F-16”

That only proves how little you understand military matters. The attack on Kursk is a ground assault and has nothing to do with F-16 aircrafts. I also don't know who you are quoting here because I never called F-16 obsolete.

But back to the economy of the terrorist country

It is funny that a Zionist and a supporter of the terrorist organization called Israel is using that term to describe Russia

[DrBeer]

But the destruction by air-to-ground missiles of columns of terrorist Russian troops rushing with punitive operations into the Kursk People's Republic has begun.  It's all “obsolete and not a threat to the world's second army, the F-16”

That only proves how little you understand military matters. The attack on Kursk is a ground assault and has nothing to do with F-16 aircrafts. I also don't know who you are quoting here because I never called F-16 obsolete.

But back to the economy of the terrorist country

It is funny that a Zionist and a supporter of the terrorist organization called Israel is using that term to describe Russia

You don't change a bit - you never give answers to questions, you take words out of context, you stick your usual labels on people who can reasonably convey their thoughts and position

And this is written by a supporter of international terrorism, a liar, a manipulator and a man raised on cheap propaganda

F-16s are directly related: they are used against the Kremlin junta, which unleashed the civil war in the Kursk People's Republic. Ukraine is helping the citizens of Kursk People's Republic to defend their independence and the right to speak the Ukrainian language - for which they are being persecuted by the Kremlin terrorists.

Israel, like Ukraine, is a victim of terrorist aggression.

Try to refute a single word ? 

[pooya87]

Time proves everything...
https://www.wsj.com/world/ukrainian-f-16-is-destroyed-in-crash-4f6d66f6

It's a good time to come up with a complete summary of what we discussed in this topic regarding F-16 fighter jets Ukraine were supposed to receive. Over the past year I've speculated about them and how they were too "hyped up" in the Western media and with recent information that has surfaced, specially this recent WSJ article we can see that all the following statements I've made over the past year were accurate.

On the other hand, Ukraine, although slowly, is being supplied by other countries with the latest weapons. On the way, by the end of the year, already the first fifty F-16 fighters. If Ukraine has been quite successful in this year and a half with 120 obsolete Soviet aircraft,

Sorry for going OT but I wonder what aircraft you consider "obsolete", specially when you compare it with F-16 which you refer to as "latest weapons"!!!
The fighter jets that Ukraine has/had were MiG-29 (introduced on 1983), Su-24 (1974), Su-25 (1981), Su-27 (1984). None of these are considered obsolete specially when compared with F-16 (introduced 1978)! which is older than 90% of what Ukraine had before!

It starts from my first statement to @Ozero that compared to the Eastern warplanes Ukraine already had, the F-16 is not a good addition and if anything is to be considered obsolete, it is not the Ukraine's existing airforce, it is what they are being given. We've already seen that Ukraine is performing far better with its Mig-29 and Su-27 specially as we saw in the Kursk invasion.

Congratulations on receiving the first tiny batch of F-16 fighters. So how many were in it? 6? 12? Did they make any difference or was I correct when months ago I said it is too little too late and it won't have any meaningful impact on the result of this conflict?

Time answers another question as well. The number was 6. Only 6. They did not have any meaningful impact. Even if they were the most modern aircraft with the most trained pilots, 6 of them would not have made a meaningful difference.

In other words this was not too little too late, it is too nothing too late.

~ it depends on a lot of factors such as
- the pilots of those F16's, how much training did they have and at what quality,

On one hand we have Russia that still has a large number of air-defenses which include high quality and long range radars and anti-air missiles alongside a large air-force with modern aircrafts with pilots flying them who have been trained for a long time under favorable conditions.

Not much is expected of a Ukrainian pilot with little training abroad (language barrier) on a Western system they are not even familiar with.

The article proves at least one of these statements as well.
Ukraine is already losing those F-16 fighter jets. Like the case explained in the WSJ article. If it were shot down by a Russia air-defense it proves what I said about Russian air-superiority or rather air-dominance.

But also if the Americans are telling the truth and the Ukrainian pilot has actually crashed the plane it proves the other thing I said. The training they received (abroad, with language barrier on a Western system they are not familiar or comfortable with) is not at all enough to make the aircrafts they received useful.

Let's get back to topic. This whole F-16 talk may seem off topic but it is actually very on-topic. Why didn't the US regime give Ukraine more than 6 of these jets? Why is the regime giving them very little ammunition as well? Why is the regime dragging this conflict on and prohibiting Ukraine from negotiating?

Read the title of the topic another time. That's the US regime's goal. A war of attrition against Russia and in order to "implode Russia", the US regime has to destroy Ukraine first. This is why so little is being given to them to only keep them in this conflict without letting them being defeated and at the same time without allowing them to gain any victory over Russia! At the same time prohibiting any peace negotiations that could lead to a cease fire.

This is why the Istanbul peace treaty that Ukraine and Russia came up with only a month into the conflict that would have ended all the past 3 years' death and destruction right then and there, had to be rejected. A peace treaty that US regime ordered to be rejected through their proxy, Boris Johnson.

Is Russian economy "imploding" or as OP quoted from the American mouthpiece "The economy is imploding. We forecast a GDP collapse of -30% by end-2022". Did that happen? I don't see it. The 2022 GDP growth was -2.1 and +3.6 for 2023 according to the WorldBank. Compared to the bigger negative growths Russia has had like the -7.8 in 2009, this seems like nothing.
https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG?end=2023&locations=RU&start=1990&view=chart
Unfortunately this means US regime will not allow this conflict to end until either they reach their goal and Russian economy "implodes" or there is nothing left of Ukraine.

[DrBeer]

Russia has spent eight years and three trillion rubles on import substitution...
Results: according to the Minister of Economy, “import substitution turned out to be... unprofitable and expensive. Import substitution works only if there is access to foreign markets, where goods produced in the country will be sold. Production of small volumes of goods for the domestic market generates expensive non-competitive products that will not be bought by local consumers”. In general - expected
What import substitution, if the country is an international pariah, technologically backward, still living mostly on what was created in the USSR 

[Argoo]

Let's get back to topic. This whole F-16 talk may seem off topic but it is actually very on-topic. Why didn't the US regime give Ukraine more than 6 of these jets? Why is the regime giving them very little ammunition as well? Why is the regime dragging this conflict on and prohibiting Ukraine from negotiating?

Read the title of the topic another time. That's the US regime's goal. A war of attrition against Russia and in order to "implode Russia", the US regime has to destroy Ukraine first. This is why so little is being given to them to only keep them in this conflict without letting them being defeated and at the same time without allowing them to gain any victory over Russia! At the same time prohibiting any peace negotiations that could lead to a cease fire.

This is why the Istanbul peace treaty that Ukraine and Russia came up with only a month into the conflict that would have ended all the past 3 years' death and destruction right then and there, had to be rejected. A peace treaty that US regime ordered to be rejected through their proxy, Boris Johnson.

Everything is not as clear as it seems at first glance. It is no secret that Ukraine itself, without the support of Europe and the United States, would not have been able to withstand fighting for two and a half years against the military aggression of such a large state as Russia. And then in almost every populated area of Ukraine, what happened in the temporarily occupied Bucha near Kiev, where civilian corpses lay in basements and right on the streets, would have happened. Even at the cost of great losses, Ukraine will defend its freedom and independence from Russia. Will it fall under the influence of the United States? Perhaps, but the influence of the United States on Ukraine is much preferable to the influence of a wild and cruel Russia.

Meanwhile, the war has been going on for the third year of economic exhaustion, not in the format of "Ukraine versus Russia", but in the format of "the West versus Russia", and Russia is clearly no longer able to withstand such a confrontation. According to economists' forecasts, already at the beginning of 2025, Russia will not be able to fully continue the war and will be forced to make big concessions just to end it. We already see that Putin changes the preconditions for peace talks with Ukraine every few days in favor of constant and ever greater concessions. If until recently it was the withdrawal of the Ukrainian Armed Forces from four regions of Ukraine, now this is no longer mentioned, just as it is not mentioned that after the Ukrainian Armed Forces entered the Kursk region, the Kremlin declared that there would be no negotiations until the "bandits" left the Kursk region. We are already talking about the Istanbul agreements (as we see, even at this forum), which Ukraine did not agree to in the first months of the war as not entirely beneficial for it and because of Ukraine's successes at the front.

The first six F-16 aircraft have arrived in Ukraine. But this is only the first batch. By the end of the year there should be 20 of them, and then even more. But it is not even about their quantity, although this is also of great importance. The main thing is that Ukraine is completely switching over to NATO armament. And soon Ukraine will have its own pilot and technician instructors for these aircraft, as well as for other NATO military equipment. And given that in Ukraine one foreign language - Russian - should soon be replaced by the mass study of another foreign language - English, the problem of the language barrier will disappear completely.

[pooya87]

It is no secret that Ukraine itself, without the support of Europe and the United States, would not have been able to withstand fighting ~ Will it fall under the influence of the United States? Perhaps, but the influence of the United States on Ukraine is much preferable to the influence of a wild and cruel Russia.

There is a famous saying that goes "it may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal".

Russia is the neighbor. People of Ukraine and Russia share a lot culture, history, language, etc. that predates the invention of the colony known as USA by hundreds of years. Not to mention that what you refer to as "influence" is not influence at all. It is full control. At this point that control is so deep that Ukraine acts as a US proxy.

According to economists' forecasts, already at the beginning of 2025, Russia will not be able to fully continue the war and will be forced to make big concessions just to end it.

What is the source of these forecasts? The same source as what OP shared saying by the end of 2022 Russian economy would implode?

The first six F-16 aircraft have arrived in Ukraine. But this is only the first batch. By the end of the year there should be 20 of them, and then even more.

They were capable of giving Ukraine hundreds of F-16 aircrafts 3 years ago. They are obsolete for NATO members and they've been trying to replace them. They also have facilities to build, repair and manufacture spare parts for these things inside Europe which makes it a lot easier to hand them over to Ukraine.

But as I've said many times before, they are not helping Ukraine win a war against an invader. They are using Ukraine to fight a competitor to weaken it. If this war had ended 3 years ago (like through the Istanbul peace treaty that US didn't allow to be agreed upon) it would not have damaged Russia like this.

This means they will give Ukraine only enough to keep it in the war. Not letting it lose OR win. They will definitely give Ukraine more F-16 aircrafts in the future specially now that Ukraine has lost so many troops and vital equipment in the failed Kursk invasion and Russia has advanced a lot more in other fronts.

And given that in Ukraine one foreign language - Russian - should soon be replaced by the mass study of another foreign language - English,

If Russian is a foreign language, what does that make English?!

[DrBeer]

But the destruction by air-to-ground missiles of columns of terrorist Russian troops rushing with punitive operations into the Kursk People's Republic has begun.  It's all “obsolete and not a threat to the world's second army, the F-16”

That only proves how little you understand military matters. The attack on Kursk is a ground assault and has nothing to do with F-16 aircrafts. I also don't know who you are quoting here because I never called F-16 obsolete.

But back to the economy of the terrorist country

It is funny that a Zionist and a supporter of the terrorist organization called Israel is using that term to describe Russia

Of course, the opinion of a military expert like you is much appreciated    Do you even know how to load the magazine of an automatic rifle ?

And what attack on Kursk are you talking about ? It's an ordinary civil war there. There are rebels against the Kremlin junta !  We are just helping the Ukrainian-speaking population of the Kursk People's Republic. But we are not there!  And the Kursk People's Republic was attacked by Kremlin and Iranian terrorists, and all this on orders from North Korea, under which Russia and Putin lay down !

And tell me about the F-16, what did I say wrong ? You know, like “don't understand anything” ? Your opinion is very important for me, I am very much waiting for explanations from an “expert” 

And please - here, in front of everyone, prove that I am a Zionist and that Israel is a terrorist organization. Or just admit that you are a common victim of Russian stupid propaganda

You have to prove it with arguments, references to international documents, explaining the meaning of all words. Ok, or as always you will start talking nonsense and primitive insults ?


PS Old F-16 is called old F-16 by your favorite Kremlin propagandists )

[Argoo]

According to economists' forecasts, already at the beginning of 2025, Russia will not be able to fully continue the war and will be forced to make big concessions just to end it.

What is the source of these forecasts? The same source as what OP shared saying by the end of 2022 Russian economy would implode?

The fact that Putin feels the tragic nature of the situation for him on the Ukrainian front can be clearly seen in his statements about peace negotiations with Ukraine, especially after the main line of the Russian offensive - Pokrovsk - has recently stalled.

As is known, before the Swiss peace summit, Putin publicly issued an ultimatum: Ukraine must give up four regions - Luhansk, Donetsk, Zaporizhia and Kherson, and within the administrative borders, and not along the front line. At the same time, the opinion was expressed that if Ukraine does not agree to fulfill them, then in the future the preliminary conditions for negotiations will only become tougher.

After the Ukrainian Armed Forces entered the Kursk region of Russia and began to control several thousand square kilometers of Russian territory, the Kremlin announced that there can be no negotiations with Ukraine until the "bandits" leave Russian territory.

Now Putin has suddenly changed his tune.
Thus, at the annual Eastern Economic Forum (EEF) in Vladivostok, which took place on September 3-6, Putin again spoke about peace with Ukraine, and in a format much more acceptable to Ukraine.
"Are we ready to negotiate with them (Ukraine)? We have never refused this, but not on the basis of some ephemeral demands, but on the basis of those documents that were agreed upon and actually initialed in Istanbul," Putin said.
https://news.zerkalo.io/world/77585.html
Thus, Putin himself admitted that his previous ultimatums to Ukraine were ephemeral.

Even Russian propagandist, regular participant in Russian political talk shows Yakov Kedmi drew attention to this. Putin is begging for negotiations with Ukraine, this is the position of the weak, he said.
https://www.dialog.ua/russia/301157_1725697235/amp

[Oluwa-btc]

Of course, the wish of satan was to ruin the economy with the sanctions to starve them of fund, see them suffer and possibly protest against Putin/government (for regime change). Well, I'm convinced the opposite happened as the sanctions heavily backfired as was predicted before they began. The strength of Russia ruble is one of important proof to this, the increase in income for Russians, increase in wheat productions, etc.
I see the economy doing even better as Russia Influence expands globally.

This is hilarious I must say and looking at the economic strength of the Russian I think they are doing well in this regards but they tend not to buy into any orders cause they think they are better of with what they got clearly did they know they ought to seek for help from other countries so as not to jeopardize their economy in the long run.

And this is where I see this coming from and I know what have being given the Russians high hopes even before the war started,it's because they have invested more on their arms and ammunition and with time they can have something out of it but mind you it isn't for so long tho due to the war between Ukraine and Russia they've been unable to balance their economy which is because of the crisis from the war and at some point the Russian won't be able to tackle thier economic downfall but right now.

[pooya87]

According to economists' forecasts, already at the beginning of 2025, Russia will not be able to fully continue the war and will be forced to make big concessions just to end it.

What is the source of these forecasts? The same source as what OP shared saying by the end of 2022 Russian economy would implode?

The fact that Putin feels the tragic nature of the situation for him on the Ukrainian front can be clearly seen in his statements about peace negotiations with Ukraine

"Putin changed his tone" is not a solid reasoning for your speculation though. You have to bring up more solid economic facts than that. Otherwise it is obvious nobody with half a brain would wants to be in a war that costs a lot of money, troops and equipment, etc. for ever even if they have been winning so far.

That's not to mention Russia was talking about negotiations before they even started the invasion! They also negotiated shortly after they invaded and even come to an agreement, a favorable agreement for Ukraine (which US prevented from succeeding).
So in that front I see no changes hence I reject your reasoning. It is not a valid reason to conclude that the Russian economy is imploding or they can't continue past 2024.
Now let me help you with some valid arguments you could have made LOL (that's right I am countering myself instead of you)

Russian economy is showing healthy stats on paper. For example the GDP is growing and the forecasts are predicting more growth in the future. But this is all "on paper" as I said. Under the hood this is not a healthy economy because the way they could keep their economy alive (prevent it from imploding as those stupid economists predicted 3 years ago) was to absorb all the unemployed people into other industries, mainly the military industry. The military industry thrives as the war rages on and there is demand for weapons and equipment this industry needs to produce more of.
That hurts all other industries and the economy as a whole and most importantly it can not be sustained in long term.

This is the type of economic fact you can use to support your claims.

Now the reason why I still don't consider that enough reason to claim "Russian economy is imploding" is because what they did is a temporary thing to get them over the initial shock to the economy and the unemployment. And it is not all they've been doing.
3 years ago I said "a big shuffle is going on". Economic partners has been changing. For example the ultra cheap Russian gas that used to go to Germany so that German economy could thrive is now going to India, China and elsewhere so that their economies can thrive instead. It takes time to find that replacement but Russia is receiving the same amount of revenue more or less!
Russians have also been very active finding other economic partners. Need I remind you of BRICS? The same BRICS that currently over a hundred countries are desperate to join...

Although I don't want to predict anything but all these efforts are neutralizing the negative effects of other things on Russian economy. This is why their economy didn't "implode" 2 years ago and it is why the chances of it imploding a year from now is very small.

[Argoo]

That's not to mention Russia was talking about negotiations before they even started the invasion! They also negotiated shortly after they invaded and even come to an agreement, a favorable agreement for Ukraine (which US prevented from succeeding).

Putin almost always hypocritically stated that Russia is always open to negotiations. But in fact, the preconditions for negotiations were such that this would mean the capitulation of Ukraine. Therefore, such a willingness to accept the capitulation of Ukraine did not suit the people of Ukraine and its military-political leadership.

The so-called Istanbul Agreement, which was negotiated in February-April 2022, was not actually beneficial to Ukraine, because it was imposed on Ukraine under the threat of continued attacks by Russian troops invading Ukraine. Russia demanded recognition of the occupied Crimea and the Donbass region, the non-aligned status of Ukraine, a significant reduction in the Ukrainian army and its weapons, recognition of Russian as a second state language, the lifting of sanctions, the withdrawal of claims against Russia in international courts and other desires of Putin. The parties never came to an agreement, much remained unresolved, some issues were left for consideration by the heads of state at a personal meeting. And most importantly, Russia did not give any guarantees that it would not attack Ukraine again. This meant that at any time Russia could accuse Ukraine of not fulfilling the terms of the agreement and, having prepared, begin the next stage of military aggression.

[pooya87]

The so-called Istanbul Agreement, which was negotiated in February-April 2022, was not actually beneficial to Ukraine

From what I've read about the Istanbul Communiqué, it looked the exact opposite and it benefited Ukraine greatly, specially when compared to the alternative! In fact that is exactly whey the Ukrainian negotiators agreed to it and signed the documents back then.

If Zionist Zenesky hadn't listened to his masters orders and hadn't torn apart the agreement that Ukraine had signed:
1. Russia would have pulled out of Ukraine and the 20% that they now own and will never give up would have come back to Ukraine
2. Nearly half of the population of Ukraine (18 to 20 million) wouldn't have been forced to escape the country and flood Europe causing a lot of problems in Europe
3. All the Ukrainian infrastructure that were destroyed over the past 3 years would have been intact!
4. Countless youngsters wouldn't have been arrested in the middle of streets to be forced to go to the front line and die defending against Russia
...

[Argoo]

The so-called Istanbul Agreement, which was negotiated in February-April 2022, was not actually beneficial to Ukraine

From what I've read about the Istanbul Communiqué, it looked the exact opposite and it benefited Ukraine greatly, specially when compared to the alternative! In fact that is exactly whey the Ukrainian negotiators agreed to it and signed the documents back then.

If Zionist Zenesky hadn't listened to his masters orders and hadn't torn apart the agreement that Ukraine had signed:
1. Russia would have pulled out of Ukraine and the 20% that they now own and will never give up would have come back to Ukraine
2. Nearly half of the population of Ukraine (18 to 20 million) wouldn't have been forced to escape the country and flood Europe causing a lot of problems in Europe
3. All the Ukrainian infrastructure that were destroyed over the past 3 years would have been intact!
4. Countless youngsters wouldn't have been arrested in the middle of streets to be forced to go to the front line and die defending against Russia
...

Once again, I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the Istanbul Agreement was not signed by either the Ukrainian or Russian side. Otherwise, Putin would now be saying that Ukraine, having signed the agreement, does not fulfill its terms. There were certain developments, the parties put forward their demands, approached mutual understanding in some minor issues, but in significant issues they remained in their positions.

On June 17, Putin received representatives of seven African countries in St. Petersburg and for the first time showed a draft of a possible peace agreement with the Ukrainian side called "an agreement on permanent neutrality and security guarantees for Ukraine", which contained 18 articles with an appendix on the maximum number of Ukrainian Armed Forces and weapons. At this meeting, Putin casually showed it to the cameras, but it is clearly visible that there are no signatures there.
https://focus.ua/politics/573644-stambulskiy-dogovor-kakoy-mir-dlya-ukrainy-pytaetsya-navyazat-putin

A total of four face-to-face meetings of these agreements in preparation took place - three in Belarus and the last one on March 29 in Istanbul. At the fourth meeting, a final communiqué was agreed upon. At the same time, Ukraine proposed concluding a new international treaty with the signatures of the permanent members of the UN Security Council - France, the USA, Great Britain, Russia, Turkey, Germany, Canada, Poland and Israel. Russia had already signed the Budapest Memorandum with Ukraine on providing Ukraine with security guarantees in exchange for Ukraine's renunciation of the world's third-largest nuclear arsenal, but Russia treacherously violated it in 2014.

As for the war itself, it is not over yet and it is not yet known under what conditions it will end. Now it is entering a very interesting stage, when Russia is running out of people willing to die for big money in Ukraine and the question of the need to declare a mobilization of the unprepared population arises. There may be many unpleasant fatal surprises for Russia itself.

If Russia had not attacked Ukraine, the Ukrainians would not have had to defend themselves and suffer huge mutual losses. According to various estimates, from 300 to 600 thousand Russian servicemen would have remained alive or would not have been crippled, Russia would not have lost its main military potential, its economy would not have been strangled by international sanctions and now Putin would not have to choose between bad and very bad conditions for ending this idiotic war.

[Argoo]

In addition to the fact that the Russian economy is losing a lot due to the sanctions imposed for unleashing an aggressive war with Ukraine, Putin, due to his habit of solving all issues with blackmail and brute force, is also significantly worsening Russia's already hopeless situation with his reckless actions. From the first days of the attack on Ukraine, Putin began to threaten Europe that he would stop oil and gas supplies if European countries tried to help Ukraine and prevent Russia from seizing Ukraine. This led to the opposite effect. In order to put an end to such blackmail once and for all, Europe itself refused to supply Russia with carbohydrates and Russia, thus, if not forever, then for a long time lost the European market and suffered billions in losses.

According to various sources, by 2024 Russia could lose from $100 to $200 billion on export trade restrictions, but Putin, apparently, is not satisfied with this. Recently, Putin proposed considering the possibility of limiting supplies of strategic Russian raw materials to foreign markets, including uranium, titanium and nickel. https://www.dialog.ua/business/301394_1726069313

However, such a step will deal another blow to the Russian economy, since it will further limit the Russian budget's income from exports. The Kremlin itself proposes to introduce exactly the same sanctions against its economy. Experts write that the West will applaud Putin standing for such actions.