Trump-Putin meet in Alaska: quote of the day

 FT columnist Gideon Rachman has a terrific line on the likely fate of Ukrainian President Zelenskyy at Alaska in his article today:

If you are not at the table, you're on the menu

What Europeans and Ukraine would like is an immediate cease-fire followed by negotiations on territory and other matters. That' a no-no for Putin. Russia has the upper hand in the conflict at the moment although gains in territory are slow in coming. Putin rightly views a cease-fire as an opportunity for Ukraine to recoup and renew the war at its convenience.

Putin has time and again made clear what his expectations are:

• Ukraine to recognise the four areas in the Donbas region over which Russia has substantial control today
• Ukraine to give up aspirations to join NATO 
• "De-nazification" and "de-militarisation" of Ukraine, which seems to mean regime change and a limited size of the military

Reflecting the current thinking in parts of the European establishment, Rachman contends that Ukraine would most likely have to  have make territorial concessions and eschew its goal of becoming a member of NATO:

Kyiv’s position that no territory can be ceded is principled — but also unrealistic as things currently stand. The critical distinction is between de facto and de jure concessions of territory. A legal recognition of Russia’s forcible annexation of Ukrainian territory is rightly unacceptable to Ukraine, the EU and the UK. But a de facto recognition of Russian occupation of some territory as a brutal reality — in the context of a broader peace deal — may be necessary. The Soviet Union’s annexation of the Baltic states after 1940 was never legally recognised by the US and most European countries. But it was a fact of life, until, eventually, the Baltic states regained their independence.

......Ukraine clearly cannot accept any military limits that might damage the country’s ability to defend itself. But if Kyiv is allowed to push on with its drive for EU membership then the question of Nato might be taken off the table for a while — particularly given that the political reality is that Nato membership for Ukraine seems unrealistic in the foreseeable future.

So, Ukraine gives up two out of the four territories claimed by Russia and stays out of NATO. Will that be enough for Putin? Putin has to give Trump a win and Trump would count a cessation of hostilities as one. What about US sanctions on Russia and NATO's push eastwards? Those are important goals for Putin. 

The meeting is happening because Russia found the proposals conveyed by Steve Witkoff acceptable. It is possible to optimistic about the outcome at Alaska. 

NATO will give Ukraine arms but no membership

The NATO meeting at Vilnius in Lithuania failed to produce the outcome that Ukrainian President Zelensky was looking for. Zelensky is desperate for NATO membership because that would automatically confer on Ukraine the defence cover that NATO nations are entitled to.

The US and others are in no mood to oblige. They refused also to commit to a time-frame for Ukraine to get NATO membership. There was only a vague promise to consider NATO membership once Ukraine had met “conditions” that were left delightfully unspecified. What NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg spelt out would be of no comfort to Ukraine:

We will provide support to Ukraine for as long as it takes. Because unless Ukraine wins this war, there's no membership issue to be discussed at all.

NATO clearly does not want to be drawn into a direct conflict with Russia because it knows very well that that could lead on to a nuclear exchange. What NATO is happy to do is to continue to arm Ukraine as much as it can. Ukrainians will perish in large numbers in a war that Ukraine cannot win. But Ukrainian lives will help bleed Russia militarily and economically. There is a fond hope in Western capitals that a prolonged war may create enough discontent in Russia to dislodge President Putin. That hope has been belied in the past eighteen months.

It looks as though the stalemate in the conflict will continue. The Ukrainian forces will hurl themselves at Russia in a counter-offensive that produced little thus far. The Ukrainian army has not been able to cross the buffer zone and reach the Russian defense lines. Fresh supplies of arms are unlikely to materially change the situation. More Ukrainian and Russian lives will be lost while NATO cheers from the sidelines.

The problem is that matters may not end there. There is always the risk of a serious provocation from the Ukrainian side. That will draw a severe response from Russia. We cannot be sure that the escalation will not then draw NATO into direct conflict with Russia – with perilous consequences for the world at large.