How the West stopped Ukraine to negotiate with Russia

"The failure of the negotiations will mean the beginning of a third world war," said Vladimir Zelensky, describing his efforts to find a diplomatic settlement of the Ukraine conflict. A year ago, he dramatically changed his rhetoric and decided to achieve "victory on the battlefield." What were the reasons for this and will negotiations in the Ukraine conflict be possible in the future?

A year ago, on March 29, the last round of Russian-Ukrainian negotiations to settle the conflict took place in Istanbul. As a result, Russia announced the reduction of its military activity towards Kiev and Chernigov, and Ukraine presented its proposals for a peaceful solution.

The proposals included the following: Ukraine will refrain from attempts to retake Crimea and Donbass by military means over the next fifteen years. It also pledges not to join military alliances, to reaffirm its nuclear-weapon-free status, not to deploy foreign military bases and contingents, and not to conduct maneuvers without the consent of guarantor states, including Russia.

This marked the end of diplomatic attempts to settle the conflict. Moscow has repeatedly admitted that the negotiations have reached an impasse because Britain, the US and other NATO countries have continued the militarization of Ukraine. In addition, Ukraine has digressed with every breath of wind and changed its carefully balanced foreign policy position.

It should be remembered that Russia's special military operation in Ukraine began on the night of February 24, 2022. Already on March 2, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba announced Kiev's readiness for negotiations, but without "Russian ultimatums," i.e. the demands for denazification and demilitarization. On March 10, Kuleba met with Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Antalya, Turkey. This meeting was preceded by three rounds of talks between the delegations of Russia and Ukraine aimed at resolving the situation.

On March 20, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said in a CNN interview that he was ready to negotiate with Russian leader Vladimir Putin, but warned that a failure of the talks "would mean a third world war." He called for negotiations "without hesitation", although he rejected denazification.

A week later, on March 28, Zelensky asserted that Ukraine was ready to discuss its neutral status as part of a peace agreement with Russia. "Guarantees of security and neutrality, the nuclear-weapon-free status of our state – we are ready for this," Reuters quoted the Ukrainian president as saying.

At the same time, he stressed that he would not meet some of Moscow's demands, such as those for demilitarization. A day later, Kuleba reiterated that Ukraine "will not give up its sovereignty, territories and people" in a potential peace agreement with Russia. Already on 4 April, the Foreign Minister changed his rhetoric:

"In these circumstances, diplomacy is not a central position of a peaceful settlement. We must conquer peace on the battlefield."

In April, the two sides continued discussions on a draft agreement on a peaceful solution, but by early May they had to admit that negotiations had stalled. On April 14, Zelensky said in an interview with the BBC that negotiations are underway between Kiev and Moscow to "stop World War III." He added that "Butcha, Borodyanka and Mariupol no longer make dialogue possible." On July 18 last year, Kuleba warned in an interview with Forbes Ukraine:

"Russia should only come to the negotiating table after its defeat on the battlefield, otherwise it will again use the language of ultimatums."

On September 30, Zelensky issued a decree banning any negotiations with Russian President Vladimir Putin after the Donetsk and Lugansk People's Republics, as well as the Zaporozhye and Kherson regions, joined Russia. Previously, the Council for National Security and Defense of Ukraine had taken a decision to this effect.

In just a few months, Ukraine's leaders have switched from agreeing to a non-aligned and nuclear-free status to banning negotiations with Russia.

"Everyone remembers the turning point after the talks in Istanbul. Zelensky insisted that Ukraine does not need NATO membership. He doubted that the alliance could protect its own member countries at all. He agreed to the non-aligned status and a number of other conditions. Then came Boris Johnson, and the Ukrainian leadership rejected all agreements," political scientist Vladimir Kornilov said.

"Basically, Zelensky was simply forbidden to conduct further negotiations with Russia. And this has not been done by the abstract 'collective West', but by concrete actors – the US and Great Britain. This was initiated by the British leadership. However, Johnson could not make such a decision himself. Apparently, he discussed this for a long time with the White House. I think he convinced Washington with the following argument: 'We will force Moscow to pay more,'" the expert said, stressing:

"I would not rule out the possibility that part of the High Command of the Ukrainian Armed Forces will support the negotiations. But they are aware that Ukraine's leadership is not located on Bankovaya Street. You could remove Zelensky, but that wouldn't make sense, because decisions are made by other people in other capitals. Therefore, Ukrainian generals will not even mention the possibility of negotiations so as not to fall out of favor, with the risk of arrest.

Economist Ivan Lisan told the Vzglyad newspaper: "Zelensky is unlikely to want to negotiate because he is aiming for all-out war and the destruction of Russia. The only thing he is willing to do at the moment is the prisoner exchange. Negotiations on ammonia exports are impossible for him, for example, because this affects economic and political relations.

But he can be forced to sit down at the negotiating table. The West is now beginning to understand that the chances of military victory are getting even smaller over time, as the Ukrainian armed forces have not been able to achieve success even at the height of their form. That's why the US is increasingly discussing a way to return to diplomacy," Lisan said.

"I think that NATO and the EU will encourage Zelensky to negotiate as early as spring, at the latest in the summer, if the Ukrainian armed forces will not be successful on the battlefield. The US has already reaped its minimal profits from this conflict by severing our economic ties with Europe. Now they have to deal with the China-Taiwan conflict. This topic is even more important for them," the expert made clear.

"But even if Zelensky is forced to establish contacts with Russia, it does not make sense for us. We understand well that he is unable to keep his promises. We have already seen this with the example of the Minsk agreements," the economist added. "It is necessary to consistently strive for our goals. Among other things, the enemy from the Black Sea should be cut off. Once it happens, Ukraine will no longer be of interest to anyone, as it will have practically no resources," Lisan said.

"I think that our leaders have already drawn all the necessary conclusions regarding the impossibility of a diplomatic process around Ukraine. The only exception is currently the grain deal. But Turkey has played a role here. I also suspect that extending the deal by 60 days instead of 120 is a signal of its imminent end. There are no further topics for negotiation."

A clear conclusion can be drawn from this story for Moscow: Zelensky will only negotiate under pressure from the US and Great Britain. So they have to be forced to do so. How? With asymmetrical means. In this context, one could remember in which countries US contingents are stationed and create problems for them there," the political scientist said.

"In addition, outside the territories of the United States and Great Britain, there are some critically important infrastructure assets on which the economic interests of Washington and London depend. In these places, some 'pro-Iranian' or 'pro-Korean' activists could emerge who are strongly opposed to the US and Britain. I think you can imagine something like this, especially after the attacks on the Nord Stream pipelines by alleged pro-Ukrainian activists," Kornilov said.

"These incidents will force the West to be more prudent. And, of course, the position of the West and Zelensky will be corrected if Russia breaks through the Ukrainian front in several places and moves towards Kiev. So far, such a development is not to be expected. Therefore, advantageous negotiating positions must be achieved by putting pressure on sore points of the West, and there are many of them," he concluded.

Read more of our Weekly Analysis: