Why every attempt at a Ukraine deal collapses under pressure from Kiev and Brussels<\/p>\n
This December, journalists all over the world will look for the defining political meme of the year \u2013 and one contender for that unofficial title is Donald Trump\u2019s claim that he has stopped eight wars.\u00a0
\nOne must admit that any genuine acknowledgment of Trump\u2019s contributions to global peace will hinge not on temporary ceasefires achieved by means of the White House\u2019s influence over the conflicting parties, but rather on a lasting resolution of the most deep-seated crisis in European security \u2013 the Ukraine conflict. However, when it comes to Ukraine, the US finds itself constrained in its ability to influence the conflicting parties.
\nUnlike most other conflicts that the US president has had to deal with, the situation in Ukraine is not a small-scale military, economic, and geopolitical dispute. Rather, it is an epic conflict between Russia and Ukraine, with the latter receiving support from nearly the entire NATO bloc. Over the last year, attempts to resolve the conflict went through a familiar cycle: A prolonged silence, after which the White House managed to reach verbal consensus with the Kremlin; pushback from Kiev and its European partners resulting in the US taking more aggressive measures against Moscow; and yet another pause in negotiations.
\nThis pattern first emerged when Russia and the US held preliminary consultations in Riyadh in February, which helped revive the stalled Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul. However, these talks faltered when Kiev ignored Russia\u2019s memorandum. Later, the halted negotiations were used as convenient justification for the EU\u2019s 19th package of sanctions and additional measures against Lukoil and Rosneft.
\nThe situation repeated itself after the US-Russia summit in Anchorage, Alaska on August 15. Following a meeting at the White House on August 18 involving representatives from Ukraine, the UK, EU, NATO, France, Germany, Italy, and Finland, Ukraine\u2019s Vladimir Zelensky and his European cheerleaders succeeded in swaying Donald Trump to their side. This shift later manifested itself in America\u2019s unexpected statements regarding nuclear weapons which could impact overall strategic stability (i.e. the dialogue between Moscow and Washington on arms control).<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
A peace plan with 28 points and 100 pitfalls: What comes next for Ukraine?<\/p>\n
It\u2019s hardly surprising that the third attempt at dialogue \u2013 when, following the longest phone call between Putin and Trump on October 16, the White House announced a new summit between the leaders of the US and Russia in Budapest, Hungary \u2013 proved less fruitful than Trump, and the would-be host of the summit, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, had hoped. Orban faced formidable resistance from the EU, which even restricted access to its airspace for the Russian presidential plane.
\nNevertheless, perhaps seeking to break free from the vicious cycle that Ukraine, the UK, and EU have entangled America in, or capitalizing on insights gleaned from Orban\u2019s unexpected visit to Washington on November 7, Trump launched a political and diplomatic offensive. A major corruption scandal ignited in Ukraine involving Zelensky\u2019s close associates \u2013 Timur Mindich, Rustem Umerov, and Andrey Yermak. At the same time, Trump unveiled his 28-point peace plan.
\nReportedly crafted by US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff, and Trump\u2019s son-in-law Jared Kushner following consultations with the CEO of the Russian Direct Investment Fund, Kirill Dmitriev \u2013 this framework agreement marks the first official document outlining the Trump administration\u2019s stance on resolving the Ukraine conflict. It was a real bombshell for both Kiev and its European backers. Like any roadmap meant to reconcile conflicting positions, the text raises numerous questions.
\nFor instance, it remains unclear how the US plans to address several contentious issues:<\/p>\n
What would the mechanism for US security guarantees (point 10) look like, and how long would those guarantees last if there were a change in administration in 2028?
\nHow would the implementation of the agreement (point 27) be monitored, and who would be on the\u00a0\u2018Peace Council\u2019\u00a0besides Trump?\u00a0
\nHow would the territorial exchange (point 21) be facilitated, especially if Ukraine refuses to voluntarily relinquish control over parts of the Donetsk People\u2019s Republic that are still under its control?\u00a0
\nWhat specific projects would be funded with frozen Russian assets (point 14), given that Moscow\u2019s inability to manage its taxpayers\u2019 money could only be viewed as expropriation?\u00a0
\nUnder what conditions would Russia be reintegrated into the global economy, and from which sectors would sanctions be lifted first? And why is Moscow being invited to rejoin the G7 (point 13) when, for over ten years, it has not shown interest in membership?<\/p>\n
Read more<\/p>\n
Fyodor Lukyanov: Peace will come only when Kiev accepts reality<\/p>\n
At the same time, given the complexity of the transformation that the Trump administration underwent over the past year in its perception of Russia, it\u2019s important to acknowledge the significant progress made by American diplomacy in addressing the root causes of the conflict. This is why proposals such as reducing Ukraine\u2019s armed forces to 600,000 troops (point 6), preventing Ukraine from joining NATO (point 7), barring NATO troops from being stationed in Ukraine (point 8), establishing non-nuclear status for Kiev (point 18), and banning Nazi ideology while respecting the rights of Russian speakers (point 20) deserve attention.
\nIt is hardly surprising that these ideas, which diverged sharply from the previously maximalist demands of the Collective West, sparked resistance from Ukraine and Washington\u2019s junior allies. In the days following the authentication of the document on November 21, Ukrainian representatives and European emissaries requested negotiations, which took place in Geneva on November 23. True to form, the \u2018Coalition of the Willing\u2019 presented its own peace plan, which effectively undermined the US initiative.
\nEurope\u2019s proposals include: Capping Ukraine\u2019s military at 800,000 troops (down from the current 850,000); lifting sanctions gradually, not all at once; not stationing NATO troops in Ukraine during peacetime while leaving the door open for deployment during wartime; offering Ukraine security guarantees akin to NATO\u2019s Article 5; resolving territorial issues along combat lines without formally recognizing the \u201crealities on the ground.\u201d
\nRussia has already dismissed the EU\u2019s counterproposal as counterproductive, a point that its authors will leverage to pressure Washington into believing that Moscow is fundamentally unyielding, thereby prolonging the war \u201cto the last Ukrainian soldier.\u201d
\nTrump once again finds himself at a difficult crossroads, deciding between the path of peace or war: Either his peace initiatives will prove futile, leading to a resurgence of hostilities, or he will have to \u2018wage war\u2019 against Ukraine and the EU to achieve peace in Europe. By designating Thanksgiving as a deadline for Kiev\u2019s acceptance of his plan, Trump and his team are operating under severe time constraints, influenced by a mix of internal factors (the advancement of Russian troops in the conflict zone) and external pressures (the looming threat of a new government shutdown, the situation in Venezuela, and worsening relations between China and Japan, among others).
\nWhat fundamentally distinguishes the conflict resolution process this time is the growing recognition on both sides of the Atlantic of an undeniable truth: As the situation on the battlefield deteriorates for Ukraine, Russia\u2019s demands will become increasingly rigid and non-negotiable. Will Kiev manage to stop in time and minimize its losses, or will we witness yet another crisis for the Ukrainian state, a crisis which traditionally culminates towards the end of winter?\u00a0<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
Why every attempt at a Ukraine deal collapses under pressure from Kiev and Brussels This December, journalists all over the world will look for the defining political meme of the…<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":23277,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"rop_custom_images_group":[],"rop_custom_messages_group":[],"rop_publish_now":"initial","rop_publish_now_accounts":[],"rop_publish_now_history":[],"rop_publish_now_status":"pending","footnotes":""},"categories":[4,6,3],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-23276","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-economy","category-environment","category-politics"],"aioseo_notices":[],"aioseo_head":"\n\t\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t\n\t\t