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.
No comments:
Post a Comment