[ad_1]
Ukraine’s planned counteroffensive against Russia has overshadowed talk of potential settlement talks in the conflict, but some US and European officials said the next phase of the war could create momentum for diplomacy.
It is unclear how officials will determine the success of the counteroffensive, which could take months, or how the results could affect their approach. Opinions differ among military strategists about whether Ukraine will regain territory after more than a year of war.
Currently, President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia shows no signs of wanting to make concessions or engage in meaningful dialogue.
And US officials remain wary of any calls for a ceasefire or peace talks, especially those coming from China. Beijing keeps trying to play peace, despite its clear strategic alignment with Russia. Foreign Minister Qin Gang has been traveling across Europe this week to try to sell the idea that China can negotiate.
Some European officials who have met with Mr. Qin have expressed skepticism. And in Washington, Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken met with his counterparts from Britain and Spain this week to shore up the commitment to military aid for Ukraine, sending a message that the outcome of the war is a priority.
Mr. Blinken said on Tuesday at a press conference with James Cleverly, the British foreign secretary, that the Ukrainians have “what it takes to succeed in the territory that has been forcibly occupied by Russia for the past 14 months.”
Like Mr. Blinken, Mr. Cleverly did not mention diplomacy with Russia at all, but focused on military assistance: “We must continue to support them, regardless of whether this coming attack will bring great benefits on the battlefield, because until this conflict is resolved and done right, it’s not done yet.”
Ukrainian leaders have also said they will not agree to talks until they expel Russian troops.
Still, President Biden’s aides have been exploring potential endgames, trying to identify an acceptable outcome for both Kyiv and Moscow if real peace talks begin, US officials said.
“I know that senior-level administration officials are routinely talking about what peace is going to look like with their Ukrainian counterparts,” said Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, “while at the same time talking about how to encourage them and win them back.” possible area.
Mr. Biden’s aides and European officials say the best hope is for Ukraine to make significant gains in the counterattack, which would give it more leverage in any negotiations.
But whatever the leaders think, American officials say most Ukrainians have never compromised with Russian aggressors.
And US officials fear that even if the Russian military suffers further setbacks this summer, Mr Putin may believe he can win the war of attrition.
Avril D. Haines, the director of national intelligence, said in congressional testimony last week that if Mr. Putin “reduces his short-term ambitions” in Ukraine, the likelihood of Russian concessions at the negotiating table this year “will be less. .”
Another senior U.S. official said that whatever success Ukraine achieves, Russian leaders can only order more mobilization to rebuild military power.
Mr. Putin could also benefit as the 2024 presidential campaign is being prepared in the United States, with former President Donald J. Trump as the early Republican presidential candidate. Mr Trump and some Republican politicians have called US support for Ukraine wasteful and dangerous.
China has been pushing for a mediator role since unveiling a vague peace initiative in February. Although Mr Blinken and some top European diplomats said they were open to the possibility of China playing a helpful role in the future, they criticized Beijing for not publicly recognizing Russia as the aggressor in the war. He asserted that states that refuse to do so cannot be trusted to be unhappy mediators.
Xi Jinping, China’s leader, paid a state visit to Moscow in March and voiced support for his country’s partnership with Russia, which both governments say is “unlimited” before Russia invades Ukraine in February 2022. China’s special envoy for peace. initiative, Li Hui, was ambassador to Russia for 10 years and received a medal from Mr. Putin.
US and European officials are also suspicious of calls for peace talks that do not include demands that Russian troops withdraw from Ukrainian territory, which is the position of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. China has not taken a clear position on Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and U.S. officials say China and Russia could use the pretense of talks to freeze the front line — and Russia’s gains.
In congressional testimony, Ms Haines said Mr Putin could use the ceasefire to try to seize power while “buying time for what he hopes will be an erosion of Western support for Ukraine.”
He added that “they may be willing to claim at least a temporary victory based on the territory they control.”
Mr Blinken recently said it was a “positive thing” that Mr Xi had finally spoken to Mr Zelensky last month, but he was “still not convinced” China was willing to accept that Ukraine was a victim. Annalena Baerbock, Germany’s foreign minister, said something almost directly to Mr. Qin at a press conference on Tuesday: “Neutrality means taking the side of the aggressor, and therefore our guiding principle is to make it clear that we are right. on the side of the victim.”
The main argument for China’s greater role in diplomacy is the fact that the country is Russia’s strongest partner, and Mr Xi and Mr Putin share a personal bond. Russia’s war has disrupted the global economy, creating problems for China.
“As a principle,” said Mr. Blinken, “countries – especially countries with significant influence like China – if they are willing to play a positive role in trying to bring peace, this will be a good thing.”
The White House said on Thursday that Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, spoke about Ukraine with Wang Yi, China’s top foreign policy official, during a two-day meeting this week in Vienna.
The debate in Washington about potential peace talks is amorphous and paradoxical. There are even competing arguments based on the same hypothetical outcome: If Ukraine makes big gains, it could mean it’s time to negotiate, some officials say — or it could mean Ukraine should put diplomacy on the back burner and keep fighting.
If Ukraine fails to seize significant territory, some US and European officials may want to nudge Mr. Zelensky toward a negotiated settlement.
“Dynamics will shift even if Ukraine makes marginal gains,” said Mr. Smith, a Democratic lawmaker. After months of fighting again, he predicted, both sides would be exhausted.
But some officials and analysts in Washington are cautious about that thinking.
“There is always a desire among some people in Washington to say, look, if Ukraine does not benefit – or if they do – maybe it’s time to talk about Ukraine looking for a settlement,” said Alina Polyakova, president of the Center for European Policy Analysis.
“I personally find that shocking,” he added. “Territorial concessions will validate Russian aggression, which is a global precedent for China and others that means work. Two, it also means that the West will have to accept the moral implications – accepting war crimes and continuing violations of human rights.
Among the top US officials, General Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has been the most outspoken in the need for Ukraine and Russia to consider negotiations, arguing that a prolonged war will cause many more victims. Mr. Blinken has taken a different position. “There must be some important changes in the mind of Mr. Putin and in the heart of Russia to engage in meaningful diplomacy,” he said last week.
The secretary of state and other American officials have made vague statements about what they see as the end of the conflict.
At least twice in the past few months, Mr. Blinken has mentioned Ukraine’s need to regain territory “held by force by Russia for the past 14 months,” as he put it on Tuesday. But this war is a continuation of the previous one: Since 2014, Russia has seized effective control of hundreds of square miles of eastern Ukraine and annexed the Crimean Peninsula.
It is not clear whether Mr. Blinken deliberately distinguished between these areas. Ukrainian leaders insist their goal is to return every inch of land taken since 2014, including Crimea. But many US officials and analysts believe Mr Putin will take more drastic measures to retain his grip on the peninsula.
Some US officials have raised the possibility of at least forcing Russia to demilitarize Crimea, to prevent it from being used as a staging ground for future attacks on Ukraine. But the result may be difficult for Mr Putin to accept. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is located in the Crimean city of Sevastopol.
Mr. Blinken said last week that a “just and lasting” peace plan “cannot ratify what Russia has done, which is to seize a large part of Ukraine.” Nor does it allow Russia to “just rest, repair and attack again six months later or a year later.”
Julian E. Barnes contributed reports from Washington, and Steven Erlanger from Brussels.
[ad_2]
Source link