Peace talks between Russia and Ukraine may have nothing to do with ‘peace’

Peace talks between Russia and Ukraine seem proceed accordingly and get started. Earlier this week, according to a Financial Times reportThe Kremlin spokesman said that Russia had forwarded a draft document with demands for peace talks to Ukraine, but Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy denied accepting such requests. United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres meeting plan with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Moscow on Tuesday to discuss how to end the fighting.

The discovery atrocities against civilians on the outskirts of Kyiv The Russian military attack had stalled previous negotiations due to outrage over possible war crimes. Although Ukraine drove Russian troops out of the vicinity of Kyiv, 900 civilians were still found dead.

However, Ukraine’s Foreign Minister, Dmytro Kuleba, announced his return to the negotiating table this month. “To prevent more Buchas“, said Kuleba, the country continues to negotiate with Russia. He was referring to the site of the worst atrocities. As Russia shifts its military campaign to eastern Ukraine and ramps up attacks on civilian infrastructure, including in western city of LvivRussian President Vladimir Putin affirmed that the negotiations had been reached “dead end. ”

It is unlikely that the peace talks will completely fail. More than likely they will choose again, falter, then repeat. That’s because – as history shows – peace talks are rarely about peace.

These encounters in wartime are often just a continuation of war by other means – to paraphrase the great military theorist Carl von Clausewitz, who speak War is the continuation of politics by other means. Wartime negotiation is a game of chess for more leverage on the battlefield. And often there is a ghost on the table, a main player is not in the room.

Take, for example, Hannibal and Scipio, the generals of Carthage and Rome, respectively. When they meet for a pub before the final battle of the Second Punic War in 202 BC, each had look beyond the negotiating table. Scipio is stalling for time and hoping his allies will appear with their cavalry. They arrived just before the meeting, but Scipio continued the conversation to provoke the enemy. Hannibal was establishing a personal relationship with the Roman commander, knowing that the connection could be useful if Carthage lost the war, which is a distinct possibility, because the momentum was on Rome’s side. Hannibal may have reasoned that, should the worse come, Scipio could help him negotiate with Rome in any postwar discussions. No one thought that the battle could be avoided.

Or take the American Revolution. In September 1776, the British commander, Adm. Lord Richard Howe, met an American delegation on Staten Island including John Adams, Benjamin Franklin and Edward Rutledge. The British had recently won the Battle of Long Island and with it, threatened to take control of New York City. So why talk to the rebels? Audiences can actually be Loyalists. Like the Russians before they invaded Ukraine, the British took a one-sided view of the support they had in the colonies, but Loyalists certainly existed. A reasonable display may have increased the support of the Loyalists and, consequently, drained the military resources of the American rebels. British words barely moved Adams, Franklin, and Rutledge, who adamantly demanded independence or nothing. Howe deniedand the tough battle continued.

In the case of Ukraine and Russia, neither side can expect negotiations to end the war. Both Putin and Zelenskyy most likely know that victory or defeat will be decided on the battlefield. But both sides can hope that the negotiations will affect a key player in the conflict: the West – namely NATO and the US West. arms delivery necessary for Ukraine to continue the war. West punishment, if they are pushed further, threaten to derail the Russian economy and, with it, the possibility of war. (Currently, Russia is still collecting a substantial income from exporting gas and oil to Europe.) With the West in the audience, peace talks or the lack of peace talks played a major role in shaping the battlefield.

Ukraine participated in the negotiations, which starting at the end of February, would most likely incite military support from the West by showing goodwill in trying to negotiate a solution. By expressing outrage and disgust at what Zelenskyy and his Western allies have described as war crimes – alleging that Russia denies – Ukraine emphasizes its case. Just step up arms delivery and increased sanctions against Russia Ukraine argues.

Although it is difficult to determine Putin’s exact motives, Russia almost certainly participate in negotiations for different reasons. Talking allowed the Russians to buy time and plan battles while sowing divisions in the West and trying to limit military support to Ukraine. It is not surprising that Russia has put another trend to a standstill in the discussions. A Kremlin spokesman accused the West of trying to sabotage negotiations with hysterical accusations of Russian war crimes.

All signs now point to one military confrontation in eastern and southern Ukraine. Since its military intervention in 2014, Russia has insisted that the people of Donetsk and Luhansk provinces in eastern Ukraine really want to join Russia. Pro-Russian leaders in the region agreed, but the question was never put to a vote by the people. Hours before Putin’s invasion on February 24, he officially recognized the independence of the two Moscow-backed regions.

Putin’s goal seems to be controls most of Ukraine east of the Dnipro . River as his army could have. Zelenskyy’s army will make every effort to stop the Russians and force them to eliminate, preferably even Donbas region occupied by Russia in 2014 (Crimea may be out of the way of recovery). So far, Ukraine has won a major victory in the war by driving the Russians out of the area around Kyiv. And it claims to be responsible for sink the Russian battleship Moscow.

With the success of Ukrainian weapons so far, their goal can be achieved, but only if the West continues to support them with weapons and sanctions. That is, Ukraine’s military goals require a political strategy. That, in turn, depends on communication, whether by diplomacy or social media or even by negotiating with the enemy on the battlefield.

Negotiations between Russia and Ukraine will continue, but as in the past, only one path to the real arena: the battlefield.

at Blogtuan.info – Source: nbcnews.com – Read the original article here