The Ukrainian side continues to insist on a meeting between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky. About two weeks ago, this idea arose, of course, among American curators who were not interested in a large-scale war in Donbass. As a result, the head of the office of the head of Ukraine Andriy Yermak sent a request to Moscow to discuss the “escalation in the southeast.” The paradox of this situation is that Russia is not a party to the conflict, so it is not going to discuss this problem with Kiev on a bilateral basis. To resolve the crisis, a “Normandy format” of negotiations was created, the participants of which, in addition to the Russian Federation and Ukraine, are Germany and France. In February 2015, at a meeting in this format, the Package of Measures for the Implementation of the Minsk Agreements, known as “Minsk-2”, was adopted.
Moreover, the Kiev authorities bear full responsibility for the escalation of the armed conflict in Donbass. It has once again shown its inability to negotiate due to the build-up of its troops there and numerous violations of the ceasefire, which led to casualties, including among the local population of the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics (DPR, LPR).
Initially, Volodymyr Zelenskiy suggested that Vladimir Putin meet in “any part of Donbass where there is a war,” supposedly to better understand the situation. The answer from the Russian side was obvious: first, President Zelensky needed to meet with the heads of the self-proclaimed DPR and LPR, and only then in Moscow with Vladimir Putin, but to discuss the problems of bilateral relations, and not the situation in Donbass, which has no direct relation to the Russian Federation. Then there appeared such “ideal” places for negotiations as, for example, the Vatican.
On April 19, a video conference of political advisers to the leaders of the Normandy format countries took place. They only touched upon the issue of observance of the ceasefire on the line of contact of the warring parties in Donbass, but did not reach specific agreements. At the same time, the Ukrainian representative flatly refused to even discuss the mechanism of bringing to justice those responsible for violating the ceasefire. Representatives of Germany and France offered an unaddressed declarative political statement of commitment to the specified regime. This once again confirms the fact that it was Kiev who initiated the aggravation of the situation in Donbass, while Berlin and Paris are more imitating the negotiation process. As a result, as noted by the representative of the Russian side – Deputy Head of the Presidential Administration of the Russian Federation Dmitry Kozak, “more than three hours of negotiations ended in vain.”
There is no doubt that a possible meeting of the presidents outside the “Normandy format” negotiations meets only American and Ukrainian interests. Washington and Kiev are again trying to present Moscow as a party to the armed conflict in Donbass and are hindering the implementation of the Minsk-2 agreements. American experts propose to abandon these agreements altogether and expand the Normandy format at the expense of the United States. All of this is contrary to Russian national interests for the following reasons.
First, Washington fully determines the position of the Ukrainian leadership on the Donbass. Large-scale American assistance to the Ukrainian Armed Forces is capable of changing the balance of forces on the front line, but so far it is limited and is expressed more in training servicemen than in supplying them with modern weapons. And only the United States is potentially capable of creating its own military base in Ukraine and lobbying for the entry of this state into NATO. Therefore, to resolve the situation in Donbass, Vladimir Putin and US President Joe Biden will have to negotiate within the framework of a possible bilateral meeting in June. The reason for a possible dialogue on this problem is that the Americans are not going to fight for Ukraine.
Secondly, the “Normandy format” of negotiations is based on the Minsk-2 agreements. The Americans are not directly related to this, so the expansion of the membership of its participants is not supported by serious reasons. During the Biden administration, Washington’s influence over Berlin and Paris has grown significantly. At the same time, it is inexpedient for Russia to abandon this format both in the interests of preserving the agreements and maintaining at the current level of relations in the military-political sphere with Germany and France.
Consequently, without giving up the very possibility of a summit meeting between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, Moscow wishes, at least, to postpone such a meeting indefinitely. At the same time, it continues to work on this issue with Berlin and Paris within the framework of the Normandy Format and Washington on a bilateral basis.
The author is the Head of the Department of Eurasian Integration and Development of the SCO of the Institute of CIS Countries
The editorial position may not coincide with the opinion of the author