Negotiations, red lines and conflicting moves

The Russia-Ukraine conflict is at a turning point. The parties are constantly making multi-dimensional and opposing moves. What is behind it? When will the conflict end and how will it end? Who really wants to negotiate? There are many important issues and questions that need to be answered.

There are still many unanswered questions in the Russia-Ukraine conflict that has lasted for more than two and a half years. (Source: DSM)

Ukraine is determined to win no matter how difficult it is.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky finalized his “Victory Plan” and sought the support of the US and NATO. The core of the plan is NATO, EU affirming Ukraine’s security, geopolitical position, military aid with modern weapons, unrestricted use, and providing more finance for the conflict and post-conflict reconstruction.

At a joint press conference with European Commission (EC) President Ursula von der Leyen on September 20, the Ukrainian President put pressure on his ally: “The entire plan is based on quick decisions from partners (NATO, EU, US)…, and these processes cannot be delayed.” During his visit to the US, Mr. Zelensky presented the plan to President Joe Biden, considering it the main support: Most of the plan’s decisions depend on him (Joe Biden)… based on the goodwill and support of the US.

President Zelensky emphasized the “Russian threat”, saying that Ukraine is fighting for the security of the EU and the US, so the Western allies must take responsibility! From now until the end of 2024, if the allies do not decide to support wholeheartedly, they will miss the opportunity to win. Through that, Kiev wants to drag NATO and the West into the conflict against Russia.

On August 6, Ukraine concentrated its most elite forces, suddenly launched an attack on Kursk province, Russia and has occupied it to this day. Although assessments are very different (bold, reckless, more harmful than beneficial), Kiev also achieved a number of goals, exerting military, political, and economic pressure, forcing Russia to reduce the pressure of the attack in Donetsk, "making capital" to exchange when needed...

In particular, the Kursk offensive is considered a key card to convince allies to believe in Ukraine’s victory plan. The feasibility of the plan is unknown, but Ukraine is too dependent on the outside. Meanwhile, the EU, NATO and the US are also gradually finding it “difficult to think”!

President Volodymyr Zelensky during a visit to an ammunition factory in Scranton, Pennsylvania, which he said is ramping up production of 155mm artillery shells to aid Ukraine, September 22. (Source: AFP)

NATO determined to get involved but still struggling

With the full support of Western allies, Kiev would not have been able to survive until now. The level of aid and support has gradually increased, especially modern weapons and finance. During his visit to Ukraine on September 20, the EC President announced the establishment of two new credit mechanisms for Kiev to borrow up to 45 and 35 billion Euros. At the end of April, the US approved an aid package worth 60.84 billion USD before the presidential election. But the important symbolic point is allowing Ukraine to use long-range weapons to attack deep into Russian territory, while NATO and the EU are still struggling.

On September 19, the European Parliament (EP) passed a resolution supporting the lifting of arms restrictions and pledging “collective and bilateral support” for Ukraine. However, it is largely a recommendation; many EU members are still hesitant. Up to this point, the US and the UK, the two most hardline countries, have also been ambiguous about their stance. It is not that they are “concerned about Russia” but that they fear a global war, even a nuclear war, if Moscow is provoked. Moreover, the use of modern weapons requires synchronization, thorough training, and direct expert and advisor support.

In addition to immediate concerns, the West and NATO also consider the long term, advocating supporting the construction of military production facilities in Ukraine; improving the quality and integrating more deeply Kiev's military industry with the EU and Western defense industrial complex. These could be disguised military bases, where NATO weapons are placed next to Russia. Notably, in the 10 days of mid-September, Ukraine participated for the first time in an anti-drone exercise organized by NATO in the Netherlands.

Weapons, intelligence, satellite reconnaissance, advisers and forces of some NATO countries under the name of “volunteers” are more present in Ukraine. The nature of NATO’s proxy war with Russia is gradually changing. NATO’s involvement is becoming more comprehensive, stronger, deeper and more direct. However, many Western experts believe that the effort to get involved will only prolong the conflict, and it will be difficult to completely defeat Russia. Because Russia cannot help but respond and Moscow’s actions are cautious but also very decisive.

According to many experts, NATO's efforts to intervene will force Russia to respond. (Source: Washington Post)

Russia is ready for any scenario

On the one hand, Russia persisted in attacking many areas in Donetsk, maintaining strong firepower and organizing counterattacks to restore areas in Kursk province. Moscow continued to produce and put into use more powerful weapons, increase the size of the army, and adjust forces to achieve the set goals in both main directions of the battlefield. The attacks and counterattacks were not massive, but basically the battlefield situation was favorable to Russia.

In response to new moves by NATO and the West, Russia has once again drawn a “red line”. If NATO and the West provide long-range weapons to Ukraine and attack deep into Russian territory, Moscow will consider it an act of direct military intervention and is ready to respond accordingly, with existing weapons, not excluding nuclear weapons. Russia’s response method could be as follows:

One, expel and close the embassies of the countries that are leading the way in providing modern long-range weapons for Ukraine to attack deep into Russian territory. Two, stop exporting some important goods such as agricultural products, food, oil, gas, uranium, etc. to countries that are actively involved in the war. Recently, Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin announced a list of 47 Western countries with "unfriendly" and "anti-Russian" attitudes. The list does not include Hungary, Slovakia, and Türkiye, clearly showing the division in relations.

Third, be ready to provide modern weapons to countries that are rivals of the US and NATO such as North Korea... Fourth, launch powerful firepower attacks using hypersonic missiles on NATO personnel targets in Ukraine and possibly military targets in Poland, Romania..., which are believed to store, train, and provide modern, long-range weapons to Kiev.

Five, organize nuclear weapons exercises and conduct new nuclear tests, maintain readiness and deterrence. Six, launch nuclear attacks, possibly both tactical and strategic, on important military targets in some leading NATO member countries, actively participating; the country on the other side of the Atlantic is not exempt from retaliation.

Some Western leaders believe that this is just “verbal deterrence!”, despite President Vladimir Putin’s repeated warnings that Russia, which has the world’s largest nuclear arsenal, should not be deterred. Deputy Chairman of the Russian Security Council Dmitry Medvedev warned on his Telegram channel on September 14 that the use of nuclear weapons is “a very bad story with a very serious outcome,” but the West is challenging it, so “any patience will end!”

In fact, Moscow has and will continue to adjust its nuclear doctrine to be more flexible, able to respond to an enemy attack with conventional weapons that threaten Russia's survival, sovereignty and territorial integrity. Such a statement is too clear, but using nuclear weapons is an extremely difficult decision, a mental blow for the leaders of all sides.

A woman walks past burned cars in Belgorod, Russia. (Source: Reuters)

Negotiation, when and how

The conflict is at a climax, Russia has more or less the advantage on the battlefield, but the Kremlin boss still declared that he is ready to negotiate on the Ukraine issue, but must take into account the interests of all countries involved, including Russia. In fact, Moscow has participated in the negotiations since April 2022 in Istanbul, Türkiye. The head of the Ukrainian delegation at that time initialed the main contents and the Russian army agreed to withdraw from the capital Kiev, but in the end President Zelensky tore it up.

Moscow wants to show goodwill and send a political message to US and Western leaders, especially as important elections are approaching. On the other hand, Russia has also suffered significant losses and is facing difficulties under great and multifaceted pressure from the West. Negotiating to end the conflict while still achieving the basic goal is still more beneficial than continuing to prolong a great war of attrition.

Ukraine also talks about negotiations but still does not give up the preconditions. Although the West and the EU want to continue the conflict against Russia, they also "pocket" a backup plan, negotiating from an advantageous position. Thus, negotiations are still a possible scenario, the question is what kind, and under what conditions?

Negotiation may occur in the following situations:

First, one side wins an almost absolute military victory, forcing the other side to accept the terms of ending the conflict. This scenario is unlikely. Ukraine cannot defeat Russia. Russia also finds it difficult to win an absolute military victory, because behind Kiev is the West, NATO.

Second, the war drags on, neither side can completely eliminate the opponent, suffers great losses, and is forced to cease fire and negotiate. The side that gains the upper hand on the battlefield will have more favorable conditions and outcomes. This scenario is likely to happen.

Third, there is a change at the top (possibly Kiev), with the peace camp coming to power. This scenario is not impossible, but there are no clear signs at present.

Negotiations usually take place when a decisive strategic battle is won on the battlefield. This was the case in Geneva in 1954 and Paris in 1973. In this conflict, Ukrainian forces could suffer major casualties at Kursk or Kiev could launch a major offensive into Crimea and Russia could unleash a massive total annihilation on its opponents. Negotiations, if they happen, would begin at the earliest in late 2024 and into 2025.

Thus, negotiations are a possible scenario, but forecasts are still just forecasts, because there are many factors that can deviate. In addition to the two direct opponents, the possibility of negotiations also depends greatly on external factors. As long as NATO and the West want to eliminate Russia, there can be no real negotiations.

Some Western leaders have gradually adjusted their stance, from wanting to completely defeat Russia, to freezing the conflict, paving the way for prolonged negotiations, gaining the greatest possible advantage; buying time to restore Ukraine's strength. Moscow clearly understands and certainly does not want that scenario to happen.

Source: https://baoquocte.vn/xung-dot-nga-ukraine-dam-phan-lan-ranh-do-va-nhung-dong-thai-trai-chieu-287528.html