What options does Kyiv now have Russia with escalation tries to force Ukraine to knees?

Peace is no different than continuing the war with other means. Those words were recorded last year from the mouth of the man who calls himself the spiritual father of Putinism, Vladislav Soerkov.

Eleven ballistic missiles, 145 kamikazedrones and 59 cruise missiles were launched on Thursday morning by Russia from planes, launching installations in occupied area, and from the sea. Five districts of Kyiv were hit. Twelve civilians were killed instantly, more than ninety were injured. Survivors were searched for for hours under the rubble.

It was one of the deadliest attacks on the capital since the early days of the Russian invasion. In recent weeks, Russia has increasingly escalated his attacks on Ukrainian cities and civilian population. Attacks with cluster munitions on residential areas in Kryvy Rih and Soemy resulted in dozens of deaths and hundreds of injured.

With many Ukrainians there is no doubt that the Russian violence escalation is related to the peace talks. « Russia does hybrid warfare, these are hybrid peace negotiations, » says the Ukrainian political scientist Ihor Reiterovysj. He is affiliated with the Taras Sjevchenko University in Kyiv. Moscow does not shoot alone, it turns disinformation, denials, undermining operations and cyber attacks to force Ukraine to the knees.

The idea behind the horrible attacks of today would be, according to this logic, that Russia tries to put the Ukrainians – or their leaders – psychologically under pressure to make peace quickly, even if that peace is detrimental. « But everyone understands that this is a pressure means, and nobody wants to admit to this. Moreover, giving up is not the first emotion that comes up when your apartment building is hit by a Russian rocket. »

What is the emotion? The Ukrainian public broadcaster Soespilne showed images of a woman with a lilac hat on Thursday morning, who sat on a folding chair next to the body of her 84-year-old mother. The woman was killed on the street. « My mother is dead. I hate Russia, I hate their president, » she says.

Deal with Russia

Trump opposed reporters in the White House on Wednesday night that he has « a deal » with Russia. « Now we still have to get a deal with Zensky. I thought it would be easier to do business with Zensky, but so far it has been more difficult, » said Trump.

They are unusual peace talks, says Bob Deen, Ukraine analyst and head of the Safety Department at Institute Clingendael. No large table with tight faces, but a messy back and weather. « Actually, the Ukrainians and Europeans talk to each other, and then the Ukrainians each talk to the Americans again, and then the Americans talk to the Russians and then the situation starts again. »

The American president plays the role of this Forceful mediatorDeen sees. « It almost seems like a arbitrator. The Americans make an exploration, what everyone wants, and then they make a deal and say: Take It Or Leave It.  »

The problem, sees Deen, is that this method « gives a kind of perverse incentive for parties to pretend they agree with Trump. And that the other person is the problem. As soon as Trump comes to the conclusion that you are the problem, he fully turns against you. »

And Zensky is in line with this. Not only does Trump see Russia as a country of value, with which lucrative trade can be driven, and with which you can do business in the chess of the world order; He also sees Ukraine as a dependent loser. But there is also a personality clash. Putin and Zensky are « a secret agent versus a MediaSHOWMAN, » says Deen. Putin negotiates formistic and measured. Zelensky refuses publicly and jokingly. « Trump finds that terrible. »

Seven-point plan

In the week prior to ‘London’, more and more details became clear about the peace proposal that the US seems to have been covered with Russia. It was nicknamed seven-point plan. The document itself, which would only be one A4, is through NRC Not to see. But several American media say they do have knowledge of it and the content published by them has not been contradicted by the Trump government.

In a nutshell, the plan proposes: a direct firing. Direct negotiations between Ukraine and Russia. Prohibition on NATO sole for Ukraine. US recognizes the annexation of Crimea and de-Facto Russian control over the four occupied provinces in the east and south of Ukraine. Ukraine must sign the mineral deal with the US, in which profits from natural resources must be shared with American companies. All sanctions imposed on the US on Russia are lifted.

According to experts, there were two scenarios: Ukraine suggested a thirty days of ceasefires, after which on the basis of confidence that the violence will end, negotiations can be made of the conditions of peace. Moscow wants the opposite: first distribute the loot. The Russian preference finds his impact in the American peace proposal.

Analyst Deen calls it in accordance with the theory of conflict termination « very logical » to start with a temporary ceasefire and thus create space for negotiations. That Russia does not feel for this, « has to do with the relative dynamics on the battlefield, » he says. « Since the Russians prevail, they want something in return to stop fighting. »

The plan as it is now exceeds several ‘red lines’ for Ukraine and Europe. The most important thing is probably the formal recognition of the annexation of Crimea. Described by Trump as a ‘non-issue’ because Russia was already checking in 2014. But it is impossible under the Ukrainian constitution, and would be political suicide for the government to agree.

Dangerous precedent

Recognition also offers a dangerous precedent. The Russian occupation of Crimea is a violation of the UN Charter. The idea that boundaries cannot be pushed with violence is a fundamental part of international law. Rewarding the Russian military acquisition with recognition of the conquered area can create a precedent for other leaders who want to appropriate the green grass from the other side of the border.

« This creates a very dangerous precedent for Europe, » says Reiterovych. « Europe has a history of constant territorial conflicts. Every country has some territorial claim on another. »

After the Second World War, the borders were finally declared. « But the first country to violate this agreement in the twenty -first century is the Russian Federation. If this is rewarded, that is a harbinger of major problems. Then the Spirit is out of the bottle, » said Reiterovysj.

I think the hot phase of the war will end this year

Deen agrees. « The » temporary control « of an area is essentially different from the formal transfer of the sovereignty of an area. I don’t know if Trump is so sharp on his retina. Perhaps because he also has an ambiguous attitude towards territorial integrity. If you look at Greenland, Canada and the Golan height. »

A middle way could be that the United States recognizes Crimea as Russian, but not the international community. « Then you get a very strange situation, » says Deen. « We know it, from Kosovo for example. »

The question arises as to whether it is possible that a peace agreement could weaken Ukraine in such a way that fighting is better. That is possible, Deen says, if the Ukraine brings in such a weak position that it cannot defend itself in the future. « That is one of the positive elements that I have seen so far. That there is nothing capable of the Russian requirement of demilitarization. »

A Ukrainian girl in her room in a damaged building in Kyiv on Thursday, after a Russian rocket attack on the Ukrainian capital.

Photo Tetiana Dzhafarova / AFP

Reiterovytsj also sees it not terribly negative for his country. « I think the hot phase of the war will end this year. I see a big chance for a freezing of the conflict. If Ukraine gets security guarantees, that phase could take a long time. If not – then Russia will attack again. But then I will have bad news for our European friends: Russia will want to be the European Union. »

The American turn to isolationism has ensured that Europe has become ‘problem owner’ of Ukraine. « The good news is that Europeans have been given a place at the table during the negotiations, » says Deen. « In fact, Europe wants that too, it is a litmus test to see if we can stand for something if needed. » Nevertheless, for the time being with more nervousness than decisiveness, this new responsibility is being responded to – especially if it appears that the United States will really do nothing for Europe anymore. « Then you immediately notice how vulnerable that is. »

To share

Mail the editors