Due to the aggravation of the battlefield situation between Ukraine and Russia, talks about the probability of negotiations have resumed. At the beginning of 2023, there were hopes that Kyiv would be able to take a “position of strength” in the negotiation process if the counterattack was effective. Now, the issue of negotiations and communication has narrowed.
Output data
The first important point is the willingness of the West to invest in military actions, and this willingness decreases every month. Events related to the possible election of Trump added to the tension. The situation in Europe does not look very positive either. At the first opportunity, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz is trying to emphasize that his country does not bear primary responsibility for Ukraine. He is afraid of the possible rejection of Kyiv by the USA, so he constantly reminds that he will no longer be able to repeat the same generous gestures, and the American government understands less and less why it has to pull the yoke of European security harder than Europe itself.
In the context of the West’s tiredness, behind closed doors, politicians are increasingly repeating that Ukraine must open its eyes and finally give up the idea of winning back its territories. And to end the war, something like the Minsk model 2015 is needed.
Are there prospects?
Putin often mentions the negotiations, but the key moment he puts Kyiv’s agreement to “denazification.” If translated into the language of ordinary people, it means Ukraine’s refusal of independence and sovereignty.
In 2015, during the Minsk agreements, Merkel hoped that such bonuses as “Nord Stream-2” could appease the Kremlin and convince it to abandon its intention to regain Ukraine. Russia has made a bet that interest in Kyiv in the West will decrease over the years, and it will be left alone in the face of Russian aggression. But it was a miscalculation.
And what’s next?
Now, analysts believe that the biggest problem is that the Minsk agreements fully expected that Russia would not launch a full-scale attack on Ukraine, so they did not foresee a change in military potential. Therefore, international partners provided weapons precisely to maintain the line of fire in Donbas and Luhansk region, and no more.
Meanwhile, in two years of open confrontation, Putin’s point of view has not changed, and for the sake of the goal, he is ready to make significant sacrifices because he considers this a historic mission. Therefore, the West must realize that negotiations will not change the pressure and ambitions of the Kremlin, even though it may appear so at first. Even so, the temptation for Western powers to settle things somehow through a cease-fire, convincing themselves that this will solve the problem, can get the better of reason.
