Over the past six months Ukrainians have become convinced that the Russian government, owing to the mass media under their control, easily substitutes notions. Whatever they say in the Kremlin, you should understand it vice versa.
On the eve of the NATO summit in Wales Russian President Vladimir Putin offered his peaceful plan on stabilization and stopping the bloodshed in the south-east of Ukraine. According to Interfax, Putin outlined this plan on a copybook page during his visit to Mongolia.
Putin’s plan includes seven points: pro-Russian terrorists must stop the assault; the ATO forces must retreat; there must be an exchange of hostages and supply of humanitarian aid; the Ukrainian air force must not be used “against the peaceful citizens and populated centers in the area of conflict,” etc. The only point Putin omitted is the withdrawal of Russian forces from the territory of Ukraine.
The RF president considers that his proposals can cut short the conflict he himself started and in which he hypocritically is trying to play the role of a peacekeeper. However, what peace treaty and plan can we talk about amidst the reports that Russian tanks started to attack Mariupol?
We have talked to the experts of The Day on how we should treat Putin’s plan and what results it may have.
COMMENTARIES
Viktoria PODHORNA, political scientist:
“I agree with the stand of the spokesperson of the US State Department Jen Psaki who said that ‘Putin’s plan’ is missing a serious component that includes a direct and indirect participation of Russia in this military conflict. By recognizing this plan we will have to acknowledge that there are no Russian forces on Ukrainian territory as well as the fact that Russia helps, supports, and trains separatists in special camps. I understand that we have a complicated military situation because we are losing soldiers and vast areas because of the presence of the regular Russian army. But Putin’s stand is absolutely provocative, because all his seven points define how we should surrender militarily and that we should practically leave the region under the control of separatists and Russian forces. This means it will repeat the destiny of the Crimea. The plan does not include the question of federalization anymore, but if we concede on these points, this will mean that they can continue to impose their next plan on us. So, the status of civil war will be legalized and it will be recognized that there are no Russian forces in the Donbas: Russia will get away with it.
“Putin is hurrying with military actions these days, because he understands that Ukraine will seriously focus on NATO direction. Therefore agreements with the Alliance are a strategic direction for Ukraine: Ukraine must squeeze the most from the moods that now prevail in the West. On the last day of the NATO summit in Wales Ukraine should receive a clear answer from the allies. Only after that the talks with Putin can be started and we should avoid provocation, which prevents us from getting special conditions from the cooperation with NATO. Our Ukrainian soldiers are fighting for the victory of Ukraine, not for losing our strategic positions.
“Poroshenko should postpone the process of negotiations with Russia, he should not get involved in it. But ignoring will as well lead to increased pressure of the RF: the Russian president is no more afraid of deployment of the regular army. On Monday it will be clear what to do. But if the West does not take a principal stand and make Russia concede, the worst Bosnian version, when we will have no possibility to integrate in Western structures or simply normally develop, can be expected in Ukraine.”
Lilia SHEVTSOVA, leading research fellow of Moscow Carnegie Center:
“The so-called ‘peaceful’ plan of Vladimir Putin should be envisaged in the context of the present moment. Above all, this is a tactical victory of separatists in the area of the Donbas which they achieved owing to support of Russian forces and regaining control by them over the part of the territories they lost before.
“Secondly, Putin created his ‘peaceful’ plan before the beginning of the NATO summit, as well as before the session of the European community on accepting a new round of sanctions on Russia.
“What was Putin’s purpose when he was creating this peaceful plan? His first goal is lying on the surface: it is an attempt to deescalate the tension in the relations with the West and minimize possible severe answer of NATO and the EU to Russian invasion.
“The very initiative of Putin’s ‘peaceful plan’ was gladly accepted by so-called ‘accommodators,’ the Western forces that are trying to find a compromise and save Putin’s face.
“But if we look at only this Putin’s task, we may miss another goal that was expressed quite clearly. For this it is enough to look at his seven-step plan keeping in mind the idea he expressed before about the need to shape the statehood of the south-east of Ukraine. This gives us reasons to think that Putin has announced his negotiation stand with Poroshenko. He wants to use the present moment to offer a new status quo to Ukraine and the West. This is an attempt to offer ‘Putin’s deal’ to the West. In fact he says: we are ready to stop on the lines we have won. One of the points of his plan states this. At the same time, he says that Ukraine should leave their military lines. In a sense, this is a claim to form a pro-Russian area of influence.
“At the same time Putin leaves the question what format this area of influence should have. This can be a new area of influence ‘Novorossia,’ like pro-Russian separatists assert. Or Putin admits the possibility of a broad autonomy of the region presented by two republics within Ukraine, but with an absolute control of its economic and power resources. This is a knife in the body of Ukraine that would turn it into confederation.
“Putin’s plan has many ambiguities. On the one hand, he is offering peace and steps towards regulation. On the other hand, Putin regularly states that Russia is not a side in this conflict. Here lies the ambiguity. Here lies the fact that he cannot control the fulfillment of his plan (he is not the side of the conflict). Besides, pro-Russian separatists will always be able to break the engagements, like they have done many times. It is unknown whether he fully controls them. However, the idea to test the readiness of the West to agree to a new status quo, taking into account Russian interests, is absolutely clear.
“Moreover, Putin feels that the West is tired of the war in Ukraine. He as well feels that the West is unready to include Ukraine in the sphere of NATO’s responsibility. Although the summit of the Alliance is not over, the statements have been made that it is ready to reinforce the defensive capacity of its allies on the eastern borders. These statements refer to the new members of NATO: Poland and the Baltic states. But the thing is not about including Ukraine even in the sphere of indirect responsibility of NATO. Moscow can interpret the current situation as unwillingness of the West to get involved in the confrontation in Ukraine through the use of force and to give it an adequate military assistance.
“Putin offers to tired Europe, especially Germany, which is all the time talking about peaceful regulation and refuses from the idea of military assistance to Ukraine, a version which may satisfy Europe, unready to get deeper involved in the conflict with Russia in Ukraine.
“I don’t exclude that the European capitals may like it, although Washington is clearly ready to persist in its military assistance to Ukraine.
“If the West accepts Putin’s deal, it is not clear what the destiny of Poroshenko and current leadership of Ukraine will be. If the West agrees to this, it should realize that a constant black hole represented by separatists of the so-called Novorossia, the Ukrainian Transnistria, will threaten the security of not only Ukraine and Moldova, but of the entire European continent. This will be a more seismic zone than the unrecognized republics of Abkhazia and Ossetia. Moreover, this area will have an effect on Russia as well.
“Clearly, Putin is not ready to undertake the responsibility for the statehood of Novorossia, because this burden is too heavy for the Russian budget after the Crimea. However, it will have to maintain Novorossia somehow, and it will always be discontent. It is not clear yet what blow it will make on the future of Russia and Putin’s regime itself. In such a way Putin is trying to turn his successes in the Donbas into a tactic victory. This, without doubt, will be a strategic defeat of the West, because a system like this, a Russian matrix, cannot stop in Novorossia, because Putin, having become a military president, won’t be able to rule the country unless he continues the war.”
Volodymyr HORBACH, political analyst of the Institute for Euro-Atlantic Cooperation:
“Because of the actions of Putin as a leader of the Russian Federation Ukrainians perceive his words and actions with caution and distrust. We have a long-time experience when Putin’s words run counter to his real actions. If he speaks about reconciliation, we should prepare at minimum to a breakthrough to Mariupol and the Crimea.
“As for the text publicized by Putin as his proposals, this is a plan to freeze the conflict in the Donbas. Putin makes it clear that he won’t allow the Ukrainian Armed Forces to finish the anti-terrorist operation and win over the militants in the Donbas with the help of his intrusion with regular armed forces of the RF. In fact, I think that Putin would not refuse from further escalation in the east of Ukraine and a breakthrough across the mainland to the Crimea.
“As for the negotiations in Minsk, there are no reasons to refuse from consideration of Putin’s plan. We can consider any proposals. On the other hand, Ukraine is as well interested in de-escalation of the conflict because at the moment we are not attacking, but defending against regular Russian forces. We should talk about this and negotiate. However, we should understand that these agreements may mean nothing on the Russian side.
“As for the further steps aimed at freezing the situation, Ukraine should stop these negotiations. It would be better to retreat or take defensive positions, so that this gangrene didn’t spread further to the territory of Ukraine. In case of Russian invasion deeper into Ukraine, the Ukrainian army would be able to make irreparable damages to Russian forces. This would be the main guaranty to prevent their further advance.
“As for the occupied territory, I think we should not negotiate the political regulation of this situation. This territory should be announced occupied (like the Crimea) and the local government should not be acknowledged. At the same time we should accept all the Ukrainian people who want to move from that area to the rest of Ukrainian territory. The situation in the Donbas should not be frozen legally, it should be left to ripen till spring.”
Serhii SOLODKY, deputy head of the Institute of World Policy:
“It is not Putin who should offer peaceful plans to Ukraine. A person who started, supported, and continues to support the aggression against Ukraine, does not have either moral, or political right to impose some initiatives on Ukraine. This approach looks hypocritical at minimum.
“It is clear who this step is addressed at: at the world community, in particular, the world leaders. We know that they are meeting in Wales at a NATO summit. It is as well known that the European Union should approve the further package of sanctions, a more rigid that the one approved before. In this background Putin is trying to coax the Western leaders, so that the possible blow or sanctions of the Western countries were not so severe.
“Apparently, the credit of trust given by the European leaders to Putin has been exhausted long ago. Whereas in March and April, at the beginning of Putin’s aggressive actions, the West was ready to be deceived, and its policy was somewhat infantile, we don’t see any of this today.
“Another target audience of Putin’s plan is probably the citizens of Russia. On the one hand, they were blinded by the triumphant marches of Putin to the Crimea, but according to recent sociological polls, Putin’s rating has decreased. Maybe it is some 3 or 4 percent, but we can see that Russian society is becoming less hysterical. With each passing day Russians will be getting soberer. Therefore for his retreat Putin is beginning to form an image of a peacekeeper, in order to cover with this fact, say, I offered the peaceful plan, but Ukraine didn’t accept it.
“I cannot see any novelty or use in Putin’s proposals on regulation of the conflict and aggression imposed by Russia. Poroshenko has long ago announced his peaceful plan, and there can be no better, more appropriate, and optimal plan than his. Putin in basic questions practically repeated Poroshenko’s plan, having called it Putin’s plan. But if the question is about the ceasefire on both sides, Poroshenko has already offered this. We can remember what the end was: the Russian terrorists regrouped, reinforced their position, whereas the Ukrainian army suffered incredible losses over 1.5 week.
“Putin pretends that none of this happened. He pretends that namely he wants to be a peacekeeper and start everything from scratch. But nothing will come out of it, because Ukraine had a negative experience of a dialog with Russia. If we make some step forward, reach out a hand for reconciliation, the Kremlin is ready to tear it off, and they simply do not care about the signs of reconciliation. Putin had chances to retreat, set on a peaceful path, but he rejected them. Do current Ukrainian and western leaders have any reasons to trust Putin? No, they don’t. A non-peaceful plan of Putin is an indicator of his readiness to regulate the crisis.
“The only indicator of the fact that the war in the east is over will be a ceasefire by terrorists supported by Russia. An indicator will be Putin’s order to his saboteurs and army to stop aggression against Ukraine. Neither papers, nor Putin’s words will convince the world community. Everything he is doing now is eyewash. There can be no other interpretation.
“As for the discussion of Putin’s plan in Minsk, we can treat it as follows: who will praise us, if not ourselves? One aggressor offered a ‘peaceful’ plan, his servant praises the initiator of the aggression. There can be no peaceful plan except for withdrawal of equipment and weapons from the Donbas by Putin. The Kremlin understands this very well, and Lavrov is pretty aware of this. We heard all the statements made by Lavrov in Geneva, Berlin, and Minsk back in April. Nobody believes this. If we look at the recent interviews of Putin and Lavrov, it appears that they cannot lie anymore that they are not involved in this. At the moment they are looking for the ways out of the conflict, but they should do this with the help of practical deeds rather than eyewash by offering peaceful plans which have nothing in common with real regulation of the crisis.”
Interviewed by Ihor SAMOKYSH, Dmytro KRYVTSUN, The Day
