The market rallied hard over the past 24h as I think people are getting optimistic about the meeting of the foreign ministers of Ukraine and Russia in Turkey later today.
Optimism of some kind of deal brewing has risen as an adviser to Zelensky was on Bloomberg yesterday laying out a possible Ukrainian compromise. Zelensky himself then gave an interview which suggested some compromise on this issue of neutrality.
I am hearing that any Ukrainian offer would be based on a) Agreement to accept neutral status but not de-militarisation; b) Serious security guarantees - it has been suggested these could come from EU/Turkey, but seriously I don't see why Ukraine should believe those unless they are from NATO, or NATO members with serious military capability, think the UK, US, Turkey, maybe Poland et al. Forget about this idea of the EU – it’s like come on, not serious, as they have no defence capability and have generally failed to stand up to Russia over the past decade, until perhaps the actual realisation of a Russian invasion of Ukraine dawned. C) No give up of territories, so ensure territorial integrity of Ukraine - no acceptance of Crimea/DPR/LPR independence.
And the Ukrainians are demanding a ceasefire and Russian troop withdrawal first before peace talks - on that score I have never seen Russian troops withdraw from anywhere - Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Transdniestr, DPR, LPR...just never really happens.
But interestingly people are talking about it. And my Turkish contacts appear optimistic – albeit until I pointed out that an EU guarantee of Ukrainian security is not worth the paper it is written on, and I just cannot believe the Ukrainians would buy that. Remember the Budapest Memorandum?
So problems here are:
Who is going to provide security guarantees? I hear the US are not involved – so how are these serious?
Can Zelensky get any deal thru the Rada? There will be lots of opposition – not sure he can get a majority. We might be back to the idea of Minsk 2, and a Federal solution for Ukraine, which would give DPR and LPR veto on Ukraine’s geopolitical orientation - but again, I just cannot see the Rada buying this.
I can though see some logic from the Ukrainian side. They buy time to re-arm, and can still continue their Western orientation. But this is why I struggle to see Putin accepting it. I never bought the line that this is about Ukrainian NATO membership – that was never realistic anyway, and the Russians understood that. For Putin the issues were a) he just wants Ukraine, and wants to stop its continuous Western move (read the essay he wrote and distributed to every member of the Russian armed forces last summer), this deal does not stop that; b) He hates the re-armament of Ukraine, as he has spoken about Ukraine becoming an offshore NATO aircraft carrier. But why would Ukraine accept anything less - the only reason that Putin is even bothering with peace talks is because the Ukrainians have military capability and have fought like tigers. Remember in 2014, Ukraine had little appetite for NATO membership, had little military capability, and the Ukrainian military doctrine was still “Soviet” in that is planned for an attack from the West, not from Russia. And despite that - neutral and de facto demilitarised status - Ukraine got Crimea annexed and Russia invaded Donbas. So why would Ukraine agree to lay down its arms? Just not going to happen.
Now on the last point, maybe Putin is worried that he cannot win militarily, and is worried now about the impact of sanctions. But I think the above deal is a defeat for Putin. Sanctions will not be quickly lifted even if all Russian troops leave Ukraine. Western business will be slow to re-engage with Russia. So he will have got not very much in terms of concessions from Ukraine (neutral status) for a huge hit of blood, and treasure to Russia. And he will be seen now as Putin the pariah, the bomber of civilians, and his military will be seen as something of a Potemkin Village – good on paper but totally useless in war. I mean the Russian armoured columns defeated by a bunch of Ukrainian tractors? And lets not forget that because he bombed the hell out of South and Eastern Ukraine, majority Russian speaking areas – traditionally more amenable to Moscow – it means he has lost even these regions forever. All Ukrainians will never forgive him. Indeed, Ukrainians Western orientation will just accelerate because of Putin’s actions. He has just lost Ukraine for ever. Putin the loser?
Now just going back to war/peacemaking. I guess wars end for three reasons:
a) There is a clear winner and a loser, and the winner imposes the peace;
b) Stalemate, in that both sides eventually come to the realisation that they cannot win, or cannot win without huge additional sacrifice which presents risks to domestic political stability and a too unbearable burden on the population. It can though take years for both side to reach this conclusion. Think there of the Iran-Iraq war of the 1980s.
c) External intervention, think perhaps NATO intervention against Serbia on Kosovo.
Looking at these three scenarios, it’s not yet a), and I am not sure both sides have yet realised it could end up in b). And while NATO might be able to end the conflict through military intervention, including imposition of a No Fly Zone, it is worried about provoking WW3 with Russia so is unlikely to act. It is though continuing to supply lower grade armaments which help Ukraine prevent a Russian win, and I guess there give it hope of perhaps achieving point b). This might end up feeling like a win for Ukraine, in that in a David versus Goliath battle, against the odds it wore the opponent down to the point that it was forced into peace talks. And that’s the problem again, that peace now would surely be a loss for Putin, and is he willing to accept that? So I am not sure we are at THE peace talks, or is this just another point in a series of ceasefire talks, while conclusive talks to bring an end to this war are still some way off.
Great article again. Thanks for this. I personally believe we are a long way off any cease fire or truce. We only have to look at the disgusting way in which Russia has agreed to evacuation corridors and then shelled them. Russia has proved time after time they cannot be trusted. Their ideology is based on power and tyranny and they will use it at almost any cost. We only need look back at the past several hundred years. Putin is no different, he simply took a slightly different path to where he ultimately wants to end up because he had no other choice; the Soviet collapse forced him to.
An autocratic state never stays an autocratic state unless it lacks the power to shift. Russia is still a superpower simply because it has nuclear. An autocratic state will either move towards democracy (the people force this) or will move towards tyranny if the leader has the power to do so. Putin has always wanted to continue his pursuit towards the degradation of peoples freedoms and to consolidate his own powers. He will not change unless we bankrupt him or we stop him militarily.
Great piece. Thanks Tim.