- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- worldnews@lemmygrad.ml
- cross-posted to:
- worldnews@lemmy.ml
- worldnews@lemmygrad.ml
A group of foreign holders of Ukrainian Eurobonds intends to seek from Kiev the resumption of interest payments on government debt as early as 2025. This is according to WSJ citing informed sources.
The creditors’ committee includes BlackRock and Pimco, which account for about 20% of Ukraine’s outstanding $20 billion Eurobonds.
According to the bondholders, Ukraine, which received $60.6 billion in aid from the United States , could agree to forgive part of the debt in exchange for the resumption of interest payments of up to $500 million a year. Some creditors have already discussed these plans with Ukrainian authorities. Kiev hopes to involve Washington and other allies in the work.
However, the United States and its partners are concerned that bailouts for Ukraine will end up with bondholders if Kyiv starts servicing its debt again. Countries have granted debt holidays of about $4 billion until 2027.
If the deal is not concluded, Ukraine may face default in August after the expiration of the holiday for bondholders. This will make it difficult for it to continue to attract loans on the market.
Initially, creditors agreed to a two-year deferment, believing that the conflict would end by 2024. Despite the protracted nature of the situation, they hope for the stabilization of Ukraine’s finances thanks to the support of the West. 🤡
I think what’s most likely is that the current regime will fall, and Russia will replace it with one that works in their interests. Kind of a repeat of Chechnya basically. I do think there’s a real possibility that Russia leaves western Ukraine to become west’s problem though. They could let all the nationalists flee there, and it would be economically unstable rump state that’s going to require billions in constant funding to prop it up. If the west lets it fail then Europe will be looking at a huge refugee crisis. So, the west would be stuck between a rock and a hard place there.
This is why I believe the west will send troops to defend Odessa, it is the only thing that will make Ukraine viable economically to service the debt they are going to owe the west. These people want to make sure Ukraine is actually going to be able to pay them.
I agree that is the main source of panic over Odessa in the west. They realize that if the rump state is cut off from shipping, it’s going to be an albatross around their collective necks. Thing is that sending troops to defend Odessa isn’t going to change anything. All it’s going to do is create further embarrassment for the west and further fuel domestic tensions in Europe. Vast majority of Europeans are against direct involvement, and if thousands of coffins start coming back, that’s going to be a huge political disaster.
I think that unfortunately the US does not care about European opinions on the matter and realistically the big dogs of Europe seem to be in lock step with Washington. My theory is the west is going to gamble by sending troops to Odessa and Kyiv. The Russian offensive has already started and I think the wests plan is that by the time the Russians reach Odessa they’ll have to make the ultimate choice to either leave Odessa in Ukrainian hands or directly attack NATO forces and start WW3 in earnest. The west is facing a multitude of crisis so one would think that this decision would be incredibly stupid, but ultimately the US dollar at this point is being held up by the propagation of more USD into the global monetary system and the manufacturers of artillery shells and other war materials want guarantees of purchase in order to make increase in production viable, that’s really the only reason Ukraine has been getting its balls kicked in so far. NATO becoming involved full force will alleviate many of the issues Ukraine faces right now which is manpower and artillery shortages. If nato goes to war then all the Ukrainian men taking refuge in nato nations will automatically be up for drafting. Add in the fact it’s an election year and wartime presidents tend to do well and the unthinkable doesn’t seem so unthinkable unfortunately.
I will say over the course of the war I’ve had a more positive outlook on Russias position to win than other users and I’ve been hopeful for this war to be over sometime soon. This moment right here has been the only time I’ve been legitimately scared of what might happen.
Edit: holy Christ the French foreign legion was sent into the Ukrainian FRONTLINE as I wrote this comment.
It’s quite possibly what will happen. I expect there’s zero chance that Russia doesn’t take Odessa regardless of whether NATO puts troops there or not. It is worth keeping in mind that US power is not unlimited. There is still a brewing conflict in the Middle East, US is increasingly worrying about its position in Asia, Africa is pushing US out at an increasing pace. So, I don’t think US will go all in on trying to save Ukraine if the best outcome is a Pyrrhic victory that’s going to leave them powerless. On top of that, the election is only a few months away and sending troops to Ukraine would seal the republican victory.
That is why I believe if US troops are sent anywhere it will be the Middle East. Maybe the 101st airborne will be sent to Ukraine since they’re already in Romania and have experience in the European theater, but most of US ground forces are built around middle eastern conflict although not for large scale combat. When it comes to Europe look to Ukraine, when it comes to the US look to the Middle East. Biden becoming more involved in the Israeli war might affect his chances more positively than entering Ukraine. We’ll have to see, but the French sending troops in as we speak does not give a lot of confidence. Not because I don’t think the Russians will ultimately win, but because these people are unhinged as fuck.
Yeah, if shit hits the fan with Iran then US will have no choice but to send troops.
How so? There seem to be more protests against Israel in USA than there ever been about Ukraine
There are way more Americans interests in the Middle East than in Ukraine. Wartime presidents tend to do well too.
Which would change what, exactly? They talk tough, sure, threatening to cut off aid and all, but at the end of the day, they’re still owned by the same class. The same subclass even - financial capital
Financial capitalists aren’t monolith. US is sort of in a middle of a civil war right now within the capitalist class, and there isn’t a unified front on any issue. Neocons represent the hegemonic faction who think that US can dominate the whole world through force. They bit off more than they can chew in Ukraine, and now a more moderate faction is likely to get into power. It’s also worth noting that even between neocons there’s a split. A lot of them think Russia as a side show, and see China is the real adversary. It looks like Trump faction is aligned with that line of thinking, and this would be the main reason they’d wind the proxy war down.
My expectation is that once Trump gets into power, US will find a way to stop the war. Then they’re going to focus on trying to stabilize their economy by cannibalizing Europe and escalate the trade war with China. There’s also the whole thing with Gaza that still has potential to spill over into a regional conflict.
imagine it depends on how much terrorism they want to deal with and where they feel like dealing with it.
For sure, although it could be argued that the levels of terrorism would be higher if Russia tried to occupy territory where people are actively hostile. Also worth noting that the terrorism is just as likely to be directed at the west because nationalists will feel betrayed and used in the end.
Would also be a perfect camping ground for terrorist training and organising weapons transfer for later attacks on Russian civilians.
That’s unfortunately a possibility, although I expect nationalists will feel rather betrayed by the west when this is all over.