Michael von der Schulenburg – The Ukraine War could come to an unexpected end

A potential shift towards Russian cooperation and the need for a pan-European peace initiative.

Michael von der Schulenburg, former UN Assistant Secretary-General, escaped East Germany in 1969, studied in Berlin, London and Paris and worked for over 34 years for the United Nations, and shortly the OSCE.

Cross-posted from Other News

Picture by President of Ukraine

Even if there is still fighting at the front, recent developments in Ukraine would suggest that the war could end in a way that is completely unexpected in the West—with a Ukrainian-Russian agreement. It all has to do with the fact that the war may now be decided in Kiev rather than on the front lines. Central to this is the political survival of President Zelensky, who, once a war hero, may increasingly be seen as an illusionary advocate for a military solution that could risk the future of Ukraine.

The reason for this is that Zelensky is pursuing the seemingly unreasonable goal of wanting to defeat Russia with another major offensive this year. To this end, he prepares a law that would allow him to forcibly recruit an additional 500,000 Ukrainians into the armed forces. But for such a major offensive, he has neither the financial resources nor the heavy weapons that would be needed. And more importantly, as such an offensive would have to be launched within the next four months, he has not had the time to turn new recruits into trained soldiers. After hundreds of thousands of fallen, maimed, and mentally wounded people during the last offensive, he would risk the lives of those new recruits without any chance of success. Such an offensive could, therefore, turn into a collective suicide. He may hence face serious resistance to his plans among Ukraine’s exhausted, poverty-stricken, and war-battered population. Ukrainians may no longer be prepared to accept another year of death and destruction and they may refuse to let their sons and fathers be sacrificed for yet another ill-conceived attempt to beat Russia.

By dismissing his popular army commander-in-chief, Zaluzhnyi, Zelensky may, in addition, have triggered a crisis of confidence in the army—an army that has already paid an enormous price in blood in the last failed major offensive and that has fewer and fewer soldiers and ammunition for defending territory, let alone mounting military attacks. It is no longer inconceivable that he will face increasing resistance within the Ukrainian army to his war plans; soon, we may even see the first signs of disintegration in military discipline, if that has not already begun.

Zelensky has lost much of his support in the West and, with it, a major pillar of his political power inside Ukraine. The time he was received as a hero and collected huge financial and military support for his country appears to be over. Most importantly, he lost support from the US, which was once the main supporter of the fight against Russia. After two recent trips to Washington, he returned empty-handed, and it is increasingly unlikely that the US will resume its financial and military support. There are no longer any of the massive NATO arms and ammunition deliveries of a year ago, and NATO is at best skeptical about his plans for a further offensive. Zelensky was also unable to convince Germany to provide modern Taurus rocket systems, and it may not be lost on the Ukrainians that the recently started NATO maneuver in territories along the NATO-Russian border, Steadfast Defense, may, in fact, assume Ukraine’s military collapse. All of this has made Zelensky an increasingly weak and isolated president, and it may only be a matter of time until he will be forced out of office.

The Ukrainians must have realized by now that “we will support you for as long as it takes” was never meant seriously, that a rump Ukraine will never become a member of NATO, and that von der Leyen’s promises to fast-track Ukraine’s EU membership were just empty promises. The Ukrainians will also know that they may no longer expect much support from President Biden, who is politically paralyzed, with questions about his mental health hanging over him. They will also have realized that for the US and Israel, the Gaza war and the wider stability in the Middle East are far more important to than the fate of Ukraine. And the Ukrainians will be aware that it is increasingly likely that the next president of the USA could be Donald Trump, who may reach a political settlement with Russia while ignoring Ukraine. And in all of this, the EU’s repeated declarations of solidarity, apart from big words, amount to very little.

Rather than seeing their country collapse under yet another military offensive, Ukrainians may be tempted to seek out other venues to safeguard their country, and they may turn to Russia. They will remember the Ukrainian-Russian peace negotiations from March to April 2022 and that Russia then agreed to surprisingly favorable peace terms for them. A post-Zelensky government could hence try to reach out to Russia again. It is likely that talks are already taking place in secret. Even if the West doesn’t want to talk to Putin, there are regular contacts between the Russian and Ukrainian militaries; otherwise, the many prisoner exchanges and the astonishingly low number of civilians killed would be inconceivable.

Putin may react generously to a Ukrainian willingness to talk. Most likely, he will not demand that the government be replaced (after all, he has never had a government-in-exile set up). He is also unlikely to want to invade Kiev, and he will certainly not try to conquer the whole of Ukraine. His prime goals will be to prevent Ukraine from joining a Western alliance such as NATO, to ensure Russia’s access to the Black Sea, to protect the pro-Russian population in Ukraine, and, through this, to ensure that Russian influence in Ukraine remains strong. For this to be achieved, he would need the cooperation of large sections of the Ukrainian population. Putin may therefore have to make concessions. How this would play out over the Ukrainian territories the Russians had annexed earlier, we do not know.

But one thing is already clear: In such a scenario, the West—and the USA—would play no part. NATO’s eastward expansion would be halted, and Ukraine, Georgia, and Moldova, as well as the Black Sea, would fall back into the Russian zone of influence. The withdrawal of the USA from these areas, as well as from many other areas around the world, would, to the applause of the Global South, herald a new era that would no longer be dominated by the West.

All of this may stop the killings and the destruction, but it will not bring peace to Europe. And it would leave Ukraine in a deplorable state. We therefore need a peace settlement in Europe to reconstruct trust, trade, and, above all, Ukraine. In fact, the fight for a lasting peace solution that involves all of Europe would only have to begin. In a time when the US sorts out its own internal problems, the EU and its member states would need this peace more than Russia. And yet, so far, there has not been the slightest attempt within the EU or among EU member states to consider what pan-European peace should look like and how it could be achieved. Such considerations need to be initiated now as a matter of urgency; otherwise, the EU could break apart over this issue.

Thanks to many generous donors BRAVE NEW EUROPE  will be able to continue its work for the rest of 2024 in a reduced form. What we need is a long term solution. So please consider making a monthly recurring donation. It need not be a vast amount as it accumulates in the course of the year. To donate please go HERE.

Be the first to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.