Paul J. Saunders
A US-Russia summit reportedly set for August 15 in Alaska has captivated Washington and European capitals. Commentators are decrying the guest list (shouldn’t Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky join?) and warning about President Donald Trump’s possible concessions to his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. The hand-wringing misses the point. The central challenge to any ceasefire or peace deal is not who sits at the table or what Trump might offer. It is the absence of convincing evidence that Putin himself wants an agreement to end his war in Ukraine.
Negotiations can work only if both parties prefer a settlement to the status quo and other manageable alternatives. To date, Russia’s president appears to believe that he is winning and likely sees no compelling reason to relinquish now what he expects to take later. Likewise, notwithstanding regular suggestions that Russia’s economy is struggling under US and Western sanctions, there is little evidence that Russia’s leader feels pressure to make significant concessions as a result. Nor are growing casualties producing domestic pressure. So far, Putin has successfully managed this domestic political problem by insisting that his invasion was necessary for Russia’s security rather than optional.
Zelensky Worries He Might Lose at the Negotiating Table
Whether or not he travels to Alaska to meet Trump or Trump and Putin, something that looks improbable if not impossible, President Zelensky probably fears pressure to make concessions that he might not have to if his country gets a little more outside help. And since he can more-or-less count on Putin to refuse a meeting with him, a pressure campaign on Trump to include him costs little and reminds all that Kyiv’s acquiescence will eventually be necessary. And that even under pressure, there are limits to what Ukraine’s government and public would accept.
No comments:
Post a Comment