Burgenstock, Switzerland: It is clear any path to ending the war in Ukraine will cost many more billions of dollars and many thousands more military and civilian lives.
The official line is that the weekend’s gathering of Western powers and other nations has built momentum towards a “just and lasting” peace, but that may be overstating it.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky after his closing press conference during the Summit on Peace.Credit: Getty Images
It was not a peace negotiation because Vladimir Putin is in no way serious about ending the war. He insists on capitulation and Ukraine ceding territory and disarming, leaving it vulnerable to future aggression.
European Union Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, at the Burgenstock resort overlooking Lake Lucerne, said that “no country would ever accept these outrageous terms”.
Kyiv’s friends – mainly Europe, the United States and Canada – built a consensus of 80 countries on how to end the war. Many countries throughout the so-called “Global South” – a vague and problematic term for what was once known as the developing world – left off their signatures. Those included Armenia, Bahrain, Colombia, Qatar, India, Indonesia, Libya, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Thailand and the United Arab Emirates.
“Some did not sign – even though very few – since they are playing a ‘let’s have peace based on concessions’ game, and they usually mean concessions by Ukraine, and basically accommodating Russian demands,” said Ukraine expert Volodymyr Dubovyk, a senior fellow at the think tank Centre for European Policy Analysis based in Washington DC. “They also like this ‘neutrality’ positioning.”
There was also no clarity on whether future talks would involve Russia, despite the urgings of potential negotiators such as Saudi Arabia and Turkey.
After more than two years of fighting, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has bogged down into a bloody impasse. Both countries continue to spend substantial resources to gain territory, but advances are rare and small. Sometimes, they are quickly reversed. Neither side has the means to achieve a decisive victory on the battlefield. Both incur heavy casualties every day.
Russia’s heavy bombardment of the past few months has slowed as a steady supply of weapons and military aid from the US and Europe has rushed to Ukraine.
Ultimately, this war has not reached a stage where a negotiated end is possible, even in principle.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky did not say whether he was prepared to engage with Russian counterpart Putin in talks to end the conflict, though he has ruled out direct negotiation in the past.
Neither Russia nor Ukraine can swallow each other’s requirements. Kyiv cannot accept Russia’s demand for new leadership nor drop its pursuit of NATO membership. Moscow cannot accede to Ukraine’s demand for reparations. Neither wants to give up land.
In an honest interview with The Economist recently, Vadym Skibitsky, the deputy head of Ukraine’s military intelligence, said he could not see a path to victory for Ukraine on the battlefield alone.
Even if Ukraine pushed Russian forces back to their pre-war borders, he said, the conflict wouldn’t stop. The only resolution to the war, Skibitsky said, would come with a treaty, and right now, both sides are jockeying for the “most favourable position” ahead of those potential talks.
The negotiations, however, are unlikely to begin before the second half of next year at the earliest, when Russia is likely to be facing serious headwinds. On the economic front, the gradual imposition of sanctions will slowly strangle Moscow, even if it has proved more resilient than first thought so far. Privately, Kyiv officials concede that it will be unable to win unless a declining economy leads to a political collapse in Russia.
It is also likely that Russian military production capacity, which has expanded in the last two years, will plateau by early 2026 because of shortages in materials and engineers.
Russia and Ukraine could run out of weapons. The latter, however, will run out first unless there are more commitments from the West. That makes November’s US presidential elections critical for Kyiv’s future.
If it is likely to turn the tide of the war, Ukraine will need another US$300 billion ($455 billion) to match Russia’s output.
Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte, the man most likely to lead NATO when Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg leaves later this year, told the summit these talks were only the beginning of a path to peace.
“And despite some of us around this table having different opinions on how to exactly get to peace for Ukraine, let there be no mistake ... we are totally united at a shared vision on principles, on values, on decency,” he said.
“You do not invade another country. You do not abduct children. You do not play politics with the world’s food supply. And you do not endanger nuclear safety.”
Any peace talks will also need China and the US to team up to pressure Moscow. Beijing has the ultimate trump card: the ability to bring Russia to the table. But China has no proven track record when it comes to complex negotiations. And, currently, a West distracted by the ongoing war favours its own agenda.
Get a note directly from our foreign correspondents on what’s making headlines around the world. Sign up for the weekly What in the World newsletter here.
Most Viewed in World
"lasting" - Google News
June 17, 2024 at 11:59AM
https://ift.tt/sVD2gkn
World leaders just pledged ‘lasting peace’ in Ukraine. Achieving it is still a long way off - Sydney Morning Herald
"lasting" - Google News
https://ift.tt/AT5WdnI
Shoes Man Tutorial
Pos News Update
Meme Update
Korean Entertainment News
Japan News Update
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "World leaders just pledged ‘lasting peace’ in Ukraine. Achieving it is still a long way off - Sydney Morning Herald"
Post a Comment