Kremlin's cunning strategy: What is Putin's goal in pretending to be open to peace negotiations?
The Reuters agency, citing five sources among current and former Russian officials familiar with Putin's views, reports that the Kremlin is willing to agree to a freeze of the conflict along the front line. According to three of the sources, who wished to remain anonymous, there is a possibility for negotiations concerning the exact distribution of the four eastern regions—Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson. As is known, the Russian Federation claims that these four regions are part of Russia. At the same time, two Russian officials stated that they could be open to withdrawing troops from relatively small areas in the Kharkiv and Mykolaiv regions. However, two other sources said that U.S. President Joe Biden's decision to allow Ukraine to strike deep into Russia with Western weapons may complicate and delay any settlement—and intensify Moscow's demands.
Moreover, according to one source, domestically, Putin is ready to "sell the ceasefire agreement" as a victory, resulting in Russia retaining most of the territory of Donetsk, Luhansk, Zaporizhzhia, and Kherson regions and preserving a land bridge to Crimea. The future of Crimea itself is not up for discussion, all Russian officials unanimously stated. In response to a question about what a potential ceasefire might look like, two Russian sources referred to a draft agreement that was discussed in Russia in April 2022. According to it, Ukraine must agree to permanent neutrality in exchange for international security guarantees from the five permanent members of the UN Security Council: the United Kingdom, China, France, the United States, and Russia.
Has the Kremlin really matured for peace negotiations?
According to an expert, this Kremlin plan will fail spectacularly, as the Americans, on one hand, cannot guarantee such things to Russia, and on the other, understand that this would fracture transatlantic unity, since even Russia's basic demands will not be accepted in Europe.
Based on this hypothesis, Oleg Saakyan noted: "All these Kremlin tricks are well calculated in the U.S., and I don’t think that the Trump team is ready to present themselves as the weak side. This is vividly demonstrated, firstly, by the fact that he (the elected president of the United States — Ed.) has still not called Putin, and secondly, Trump is not sabotaging important decisions by Biden, specifically regarding granting Ukraine permission to strike deep into Russian territory with long-range Western weapons. Additionally, as the appointments in the foreign policy bloc suggest, collective Trump fully understands that they need to keep Putin in a corner and avoid any capitulatory scenarios."
Why are Putin's plans and Trump's aspirations dissonant?
"In other words, if we compare Reuters' information with the so-called Trump plans, we will see a complete dissonance between Moscow's unofficial position and the transitional administration of the newly elected U.S. president. This shows that Russia is trying to continue the line of ultimatums with rhetoric, hoping to extract what it will consider a victory in the 'special military operation' — notes the political scientist.
The expert also predicts that Trump will not agree to the positions voiced by Russia, and the parties will continue to search for some overlapping points that will allow them to engage in real negotiations. The initial wishes expressed by Russian officials, according to Igor Chalenko, are such that they will not allow for a compromise.
"Neither Trump, nor European states, nor Ukraine will agree to such 'wants' from Moscow. Given Trump's temperament and psychological traits, it can be assumed that he prefers to initiate discussions on issues where he takes a proactive stance, rather than wait for a return pass from one of the parties. In other words, Trump seeks to propose some compromise that will allow for at least a ceasefire to be established a day after the inauguration or shortly thereafter," the expert notes, adding that searching for an initial compromise blurs the status of the aggressor and the victim, as Trump himself states that both Russia and Ukraine should stop, not just the RF. "What exactly Ukraine should stop is a big question, given that Ukraine continues to be attacked, its territory occupied, our people killed, and so on. It is clear that the aggressor must be the one to stop," concludes Igor Chalenko.
What is truly the sticking point in negotiations?
In response to a clarifying question about how exactly Russia intends to push this case onto the negotiating agenda, the expert noted the following: "It is evident that any agreement that would include such a clause will not be signed by Ukraine. Therefore, it can be assumed that the Russians will try to publicly sidestep this issue and lobby it behind closed doors as some kind of secret protocol with Trump. However, all these peace plans announced in Trump’s name include one point stating that after the so-called freeze, a demilitarized zone will be established, and Ukraine will temporarily renounce NATO membership in exchange for corresponding weapons supplies. In other words, it is about the militarization of Ukraine. Thus, Putin will not be able to use the pause in the war to strengthen his forces, while Ukraine, on the contrary, would weaken in the meantime. Accordingly, such a freeze is not needed for him at all."
The point concerning demilitarization will be the most challenging in hypothetical peace negotiations, believes Petr Oleschuk. Moreover, the expert, modeling the situation, suggests that this issue could ultimately derail the peace process, as Putin will not accept negotiations that would result in significant strengthening of the Armed Forces of Ukraine. On the other hand, the political scientist emphasizes, official Kyiv "under no circumstances" will accept conditions that do not include opportunities for strengthening its own armed forces.
Reminding that the demilitarization of Ukraine is one of the stated goals of the Kremlin's "special military operation," Petr Oleschuk noted that this issue will be a "big and immutable" sticking point on the path to peace. This, the political scientist believes, will ultimately put Trump in a certain bind, as the question will arise whether he is willing, while constantly scaring everyone with a Third World War, to agree to end this very war with a defeat. Additionally, the expert points out that the Americans mistakenly believe that if Crimea is "handed over to Putin," everything will immediately come to an end. Nothing of the sort, emphasizes Petr Oleschuk, will happen, as the peninsula is just one of Putin's tools for seizing and destroying Ukraine as a whole.