The conflict and relations between Russia, the US, Ukraine, NATO, and the EU are both surprising and not surprising, and are evolving at a surprising speed. Hope is mixed with concern. Because all sides are experienced “players”, full of calculations and seem to have “trump cards”.
 |
| Will the Ukrainian game be decided by the big powers? (Source: NCSU) |
What Ukraine counts and has
Kiev sees itself as a barrier to the eastern flank of Moscow’s threat to EU security. Brussels’ aid and security guarantees for Ukraine are also for the West. Mineral resources and rare earths are also attractive trade items. After the noisy US-Ukraine summit on February 28, the mineral deal fell in value. The US improved relations with Russia, making the “security threat from Moscow” tactic somewhat less effective.
Joining NATO is Ukraine’s top goal and trump card. If so, ensuring security is a given; reclaiming territory is not a big deal. Kiev uses NATO membership as a condition to stall for time, bargain, and trade off other demands. At the very least, the EU and NATO must continue to provide aid and support through commitments and presence in Ukraine in the form of peacekeeping forces, reconstruction cooperation, etc. That is, in reality, the EU and NATO are still involved and ensuring security for Ukraine.
Kiev's immediate goal is to cease fire, attract European peacekeeping troops, buy time to recover the economy, restore forces, and consolidate the situation. The next goal is to join the EU, gain support, and become part of a common European military force.
That is the plan, but the reality is another matter. Kiev’s request to join NATO was rejected by Russia; the US “turned around”, flatly refused; many NATO members did not support it. Ukraine’s request made it difficult for its allies and partners, hindering any possible agreement.
The US threatens to cut off aid if they do not follow their scenario. The EU cannot give up, but is still concerned with strategic autonomy, resolving internal issues, healing the rift on both sides of the Atlantic, and finding it difficult to meet Kiev's increasing demands. Russia is still advancing on the battlefield, slowly but surely. Ukraine's card no longer has much value. Under pressure from all sides, Kiev may have to compromise. But when and to what extent, remains open.
 |
| British Prime Minister Keir Starmer chairs the Ukraine Peace Summit at Lancaster House, London on March 2. (Source: EAP) |
EU at a crossroads
While trying to hold on to the US and prevent Washington and Moscow from getting closer, they must also brace themselves to support Kiev, ready to deal with the plan to end the conflict that the US and Russia are hatching, and avoid being left out.
NATO is stuck in a dilemma, unable to abandon its commitment, but also unable to admit Ukraine, because of internal divisions and the possibility of pushing the North Atlantic military alliance into direct confrontation with Russia.
Brussels does not want to give up the proxy war, weakening Russia, although costly but still many times more profitable than direct confrontation. Faced with the US's "turnaround" in relations with Russia, pushing the EU and Ukraine to the sidelines, Brussels urgently held a meeting to discuss how to deal with it; determined to be strategically autonomous, continue to provide aid, restore the economy, improve military capacity, and turn Kiev into an "insurmountable steel hedgehog".
The EU has two other cards. One is to use $200 billion of frozen Russian assets to support Ukraine, to ease the budget burden and compensate if the US cuts aid. However, this is a “double-edged sword”, as countries are worried about doing business with the EU and Russia will also find a way to retaliate.
Second, the EU is taking the initiative to develop its own peace plan. The French-British plan includes a one-month ceasefire, followed by the deployment of peacekeeping forces in Ukraine led by Paris and London. Kiev has been adamant that it will not accept a ceasefire. Moscow has firmly rejected Western peacekeeping forces and will not cease fire without a specific, package deal.
The Franco-British peace plan competes with the US plan. The EU has decided to provide military aid to Ukraine, contrary to President Donald Trump’s view that “continued military support… makes President Zelensky less willing to negotiate peace”. It is likely that the US will not support it. Without the US, the EU plan will be difficult to realize.
It seems that the EU and NATO are also in a difficult position, having to worry about many things and calculate many countries, but seem to be "powerless" and have few valuable cards.
America and its positive impacts
The US changed its approach to bilateral relations with Russia and the Ukraine issue; blamed NATO, declared its readiness to withdraw 20,000 troops in Europe, leaving the EU to shoulder the burden, which was both beneficial to itself and made the EU, NATO and Ukraine "turn pale".
The outcome of the war in Ukraine is increasingly favorable to Russia. Washington needs to withdraw from the difficult and costly war soon, avoid getting bogged down, and recoup the money it has spent. The end of the conflict affirms Washington's role as the "number one peacemaker". Improve bilateral relations, so that the US and Russia can solve mutually beneficial international issues such as strategic arms control, reducing military spending, and cooperating in the exploitation of the Arctic... At the same time, pull Moscow away from its deep ties with Beijing, creating a position for Washington in confronting its number one opponent.
Washington still uses its familiar cards, applying pressure and promising benefits to both Kiev and Moscow. America's great position and close-minded playing style make its cards valuable, forcing allies and opponents to adjust themselves.
President Donald Trump's change is primarily for the benefit of the United States. But it cannot be denied that it has created an unexpected effect, promoting the trend of negotiations to end conflicts, strongly affecting international relations, world order, and multipolarity.
 |
| Could Russia make some concessions? (Source: GZERO Media) |
Russia slow but steady
Moscow has repeatedly stated that it wants substantive negotiations and sincerely hopes that the conflict will end in a favorable way, achieving its goals. Bilateral relations with the US have improved, giving Russia a better position with Ukraine and the EU. Moscow will prioritize consolidating and making the most of its new relationship with Washington.
Russia will work with the US to shape a mutually beneficial negotiating framework. When Ukraine or the EU joins the negotiations, it cannot go beyond the framework. With the advantage of the battlefield and a new position, Russia approaches dialogue and negotiations slowly and steadily, trying to achieve the highest goal.
A half-hearted ceasefire is not what Moscow wants, but must be linked to a comprehensive, legally binding agreement. Even if Russia agrees to initiate dialogue and negotiations, it will continue its military operations. There will even be battles of strategic significance, forcing the opponent to compromise.
However, Russia does not want to escalate the situation to the point that the US plan will fail. Moscow may make some concessions. One, agree to use $200 billion of frozen Western assets to rebuild Ukraine. This amount will be insignificant if Russia achieves its stated goals. Two, accept a UN peacekeeping force after signing a peace agreement. Three, cooperate with the US in mining minerals and rare earths in the annexed regions and on its own territory. Four, cooperate with the US on international issues of mutual benefit.
Comments and Forecasts
Firstly , the crisis is influenced by many factors, including Russia, Ukraine, the US, the EU and NATO. China also does not want to stay out of the game. The goals and calculations of the parties are different, even contradictory, but there are common points that can be exploited; the trend of dialogue and negotiation to end the conflict is dominant.
Second, the US and Russia are still the two factors that play the biggest role in the outcome of the conflict resolution. If Washington and Moscow act in the same direction, it will promote stronger progress and a clearer multipolar trend.
Third, in the process of dialogue and negotiation, the parties must first compromise and agree to a conditional ceasefire. Then, negotiate a peace agreement, end the conflict, resolve related relationships and mechanisms to ensure implementation.
Fourth, there are still some factors holding back, but the conflict in Ukraine is unlikely to last more than a year or two. If Russia wins a strategic victory, or if the internal political situation in Ukraine changes, the negotiations could come to an end sooner.
Source: https://baoquocte.vn/xung-dot-o-ukraine-toan-tinh-va-con-bai-tay-306395.html
Comment (0)