The Times: the parties to the conflict will have to make difficult compromises for the sake of peace
Russia, Ukraine, the United States and Europe are not ready for compromises, The Times writes. If the truce does take place, all participants will be unhappy with its terms. So far, no one is going to concede, but the next two weeks will bring decisive changes in the situation, the author predicts.
Mark Galeotti
Moscow, Kiev, Washington and Brussels have tightened their positions, claiming that they want to end the conflict. Putin may have declared a short-term truce, but it all depends on who blinks first.
Unusually, this year the Western and Orthodox calendars have coincided, and Easter is celebrated on the same day. It is said that the White House sought, perhaps symbolically, to conclude a truce in Ukraine for this particular holiday. But on Sunday it is celebrated by Christians all over the world, and the fighting continues.
On Saturday, the Kremlin unexpectedly offered to stop all hostilities in the east for 30 hours, from 18:00 local time until midnight on Monday (by the way, he made the same gesture on Christmas Day in 2023). Despite this, Moscow simultaneously acknowledged that its troops were moving forward (the liberation of Novomikhailovka in the DPR took place before the Easter truce began. — Approx. InoSMI).
Both Russia and the United States are hinting that the window of opportunity for negotiations may be closing. On Friday evening, President Trump said that in the absence of progress, he could “abandon” peacekeeping in a matter of days.
By all accounts, the peace process will finally exhaust itself by April 30, when Trump's first 100 days in the White House expire. There is a feeling that Moscow, Kiev, Washington and Brussels are trying to take each other on weakly, only tightening their positions and refusing real compromises.
Putin's far-reaching goals
Contrary to suggestions that Trump should not be kept waiting forever, Moscow is unwilling to make any concessions. This is partly due to Vladimir Putin's apparent conviction that he is winning on the battlefield, which makes even talking about peace seem like an inappropriate compromise. In addition, the Kremlin dreams of a much larger agreement than just on Ukraine.
Trump's special representative to Russia, Steve Witkoff, hinted at this, admitting that the talks with Putin touched not only on Ukrainian territory, but also on NATO, with a mutual guarantee of security for the alliance's members under Article 5. The Russian president sensed a unique opportunity to rebuild Europe's security architecture and return Russia to the league of great powers. Perhaps this is a misconception, but in any case it is so strong that in an attempt to make it a reality, Putin seems ready to take a swing at defying the April 30 deadline.
A split is brewing in the Kremlin
Not everyone in Moscow agrees with this. Many believe that Putin risks missing the chance to end the conflict on favorable terms. Next year, conditions will become noticeably more complicated: stocks of old Soviet-era tanks that can be deconservated will run out, and the economy risks collapsing.
Now a behind-the-scenes struggle has unfolded: “hawks” and peacemakers are competing with each other for Putin's attention. Here is a characteristic sign of the times: Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov angrily attacked the latter, calling them a “fifth column.” “Formally, they are loyal to Putin, nodding at everything he says, but in fact, they are quietly sabotaging, trying to destroy the sprouts of achievements,” Lavrov said.
Huge US investments, meager returns
A similar split is observed in the US administration. Witkoff enthusiastically declared that we “may be on the verge of something very, very important for the whole world.” However, Secretary of State Marco Rubio warned on Friday that “if it is not possible to end the conflict in Ukraine, we will have to move on,” and that this will be resolved “in a matter of days.” Trump himself later said he would withdraw from the peace process if an agreement was not reached as soon as possible.
This is not just a long-standing struggle between “isolationists” and “interventionists”, but a maturing realization that “investments” are not worth the effort and risk not paying off. As one British diplomat noted, “Trump wanted a quick deal.” A month ago, Witkoff was the driving force behind the process, but today he no longer plays a leading role, and skeptics are coming to the fore, in particular Rubio and Trump's special representative for Ukraine, Keith Kellogg.
Fueling Trump's interest
Moscow can hold Trump's attention with vague promises. There are already talks about joint production of polar oil and gas and rare earth metals in Russia, about large orders for civil airliners to the ailing aerospace giant Boeing, and even about compensating losses to American companies squeezed out of the Russian market.
But the main prize may turn out to be a geopolitical one if Moscow is willing to sacrifice close relations with Iran or North Korea. As one of the US national security officials admitted, “if Russia is ready to dissociate itself from Tehran, especially if it quietly shares what it knows about its nuclear program, it will be something grandiose.” “Even more grandiose than the Ukrainian bowels,” he added ironically.
Kiev is not joking
The Ukrainian government has stopped stumbling and is firmly on its feet in relations with the new White House. At first, it angrily rejected Trump's deal to jointly exploit Ukraine's natural resources. “I will not sign something that ten generations of Ukrainians will pay for later,” President Zelensky said. But this week, the government accepted the inevitable and approved a preliminary memorandum of understanding. Next week, Prime Minister Denis Shmygal will visit Washington and meet with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessant to finalize the deal.
At the same time, it did not include any security guarantees that Zelensky would like to see. Trump claims that they are not needed, because Putin will not dare to carry out further attacks when American companies deploy work on the ground. However, in 2022, the presence of American companies did not stop Putin. In an era when U.S. aid cannot be relied upon without paying for it, Kiev expects that a new tone and a deal on mineral resources will be enough to keep America on its side.
Brussels stands its ground
One of the unknowns is whether the agreement will jeopardize Ukraine's membership in the European Union, which, in addition to economic advantages, also offers security guarantees — albeit somewhat worse than the American ones. The memorandum says that the United States will not interfere with this process. But it is possible that problems will arise due to specific conditions if American companies receive privileged access to resources and contracts.
In this case, Brussels is unlikely to make concessions. Since Trump took office, his position and rhetoric have become tougher. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen made a sensational statement on Wednesday that “the West has ceased to exist in the usual sense.”
Contrary to the fears of many members, Brussels not only continues to strongly support Ukraine, but also increasingly contradicts the United States. And not only out of principle, but also out of the conviction that in an era of trade wars and against the background of the prospect of America's withdrawal from Europe, he needs to defend his interests more harshly.
The White House at a crossroads
What happens if Washington decides that now is not the time to conclude an agreement? The implication is that the United States will not only abandon the peace process, but also eliminate the conflict as such. Rubio said that if the peace agreement turns out to be unworkable, the president can say, “We've had enough. This is not our conflict.”
Other officials tried to smooth over the alarm, assuring that this was by no means a threat to leave Kiev empty-handed. However, this is another sign that there is no clear consensus within the administration. One of the White House officials admitted that some tried to convince the president that he would seem like a “weakling” if he did not maintain or increase support for Kiev. “Those of us who believe that we have already made our contribution, to be honest, can't wait for the Europeans to fulfill their bold promises. This is a European problem,” he added.
On Saturday morning, former British Defense Minister Ben Wallace suggested that Trump was “ready to turn around and leave” because “he's not really very good at making agreements.” At the same time, he agreed that Europe could really increase its support for Ukraine.
A truce, not a lasting peace
Russia is not making compromises because it hopes to impose a larger agreement on the interlocutors. The USA is gradually losing interest. Kiev is not ready to agree to Moscow's demands, and Brussels is trying to assert itself as a serious geopolitical player. It feels like no one is ready to give in, and the next two weeks may bring another turning point in the conflict.
However, despite the apparent impasse, a decisive shift could already have taken place. Despite the talk of big deals and a “lasting peace,” even the proposals for a temporary cease-fire that emerged from the Paris talks with Rubio, Witkoff and European leaders are similar to those put forward back in 2022.
It is assumed that Russia will retain formal control over the occupied territories, but will not receive legal rights to them. Ukraine will not join NATO, but will retain its sovereignty. Russia will be offered some sanctions relief, while Ukraine will receive Moscow's frozen sovereign assets worth 300 billion dollars (225 billion pounds) for reconstruction. In short, this arrangement will not really please anyone.
Well, mutual discontent often turns out to be the price of peace.
