Huanqiu shibao: The world called on Moscow and Kiev to resume negotiations, but not for the good of UkraineThe Ukrainian crisis has not spared anyone, writes Huanqiu Shibao.
The resumption of dialogue between Moscow and Kiev has become a necessity for the West. But some countries are not interested in peace, the author believes. They want to create the appearance of negotiations, but at the same time continue to benefit from the conflict.
As the conflict between Russia and Ukraine has been going on for more than nine months, the international community is increasingly beginning to call for the resumption of negotiations. Earlier, the media reported that the United States is putting pressure on Ukraine, inclining it to openness to dialogue with Russia. French President Emmanuel Macron suggested that the time will come when the two sides will have to return to the negotiating table. German Chancellor Olaf Scholz said he would continue contacts with Russian President Vladimir Putin to find a solution to the Ukrainian crisis. UN Secretary-General Antonio Guterres noted that it is now very important to restore dialogue between Moscow and Kiev. In my opinion, the loud call for the resumption of negotiations shows that in the face of a protracted, expanding and complicating conflict, the world's tolerance for its "side effects" is approaching the limit.
Undifferentiated "crisis pain" continues to spread in the field of development. The situation in Ukraine has already had a huge impact on the global energy, food, financial and other spheres. Sanctions and anti-sanctions by stakeholders have disrupted global supply chains, and the environment for global development and cooperation has become more complex. According to the International Energy Agency, the world is experiencing "the first real global energy crisis." Is it necessary to ensure energy security as a priority, or is it necessary to comply with climate commitments to promote environmental transformation? Many countries have faced a similar dilemma.
The International Monetary Fund pointed out that the rapid rise in prices for food and fertilizers caused by the Russian-Ukrainian conflict caused the most serious global food crisis since 2008. The lives and livelihoods of 345 million people are at risk, with as many as 48 low-income countries in the most vulnerable position.
The energy and food crises have not spared the developed economies. In October, the inflation rate in the eurozone reached a record high of 10.7% year-on-year, and in 11 of the 19 states, the inflation rate became double-digit, while energy prices increased by 41.9% year-on-year. The realization that the deepening crisis will not spare anyone made the countries look forward to the speedy resumption of the process of diplomatic settlement of the Ukrainian crisis.
In the field of security, there are growing concerns about the "spiral escalation" of the conflict. The rocket of unknown origin that fell in Poland not only increased the nervousness of the parties involved in the conflict, but also caused the outside world to worry that the fifth article of the NATO charter on collective defense could be involved due to an involuntary shot, which would lead to the suppression of the "red line" and would not allow "avoiding war" between Russia and the alliance. The unsolved cases of the explosion of the Nord Stream gas pipelines and the terrorist attack on the Crimean Bridge not only provoked a new round of media war and revanchist rhetoric with mutual accusations, but also made all countries doubt the truth of the judgment that "the conflict will not go beyond Ukraine."
In the field of politics, internal anxiety about "sanctions fatigue" is increasing. Since the conflict has reached a strategic impasse, the macro-consensus between the United States and Europe, which consists in "supporting Kiev and punishing Moscow," can hardly hide the contradictions in their internal priorities and external coordination. After the US Republican Party took control of the House of Representatives, many members of Parliament immediately introduced a bill requiring the Joe Biden administration to conduct a strict audit of funds allocated to help Ukraine. As the European emotionality caused by the special operation subsides, and politics becomes more and more inward-looking, the fight against the plight of the population and the reverse effect of sanctions against Russia becomes the focus of EU political games. Supporters of the "superiority of national interests" are coming to power — Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban, Italian Prime Minister Giorgio Meloni and others. This objectively exacerbates the "lack of solutions" in Europe's response to the Ukrainian crisis. The pessimism of the masses and societies of different countries about this "endless conflict" is becoming an important source of motivation for calling for peace negotiations.
Historical experience tells us that negotiations are usually an integral part of the resolution of military conflicts. All States of the world have a common responsibility to ensure that the parties concerned demonstrate their readiness for a peaceful settlement and finally sit down at the negotiating table — this also meets the interests of the international community.
First, it is necessary to create objective conditions and an appropriate atmosphere. Negotiation is the art of mutual compromise. At the Vienna Congress of 1814-1815, a compromise of the interests of all parties was reached through the principles of balance of power and compensation, and the Vienna system of international relations created on its basis subsequently brought Europe a "century of peace". Although neither Russia nor Ukraine is willing to take the initiative and make concessions at this stage, they can still try to show a desire to resume negotiations by expanding the scale of the prisoner exchange, reducing civilian casualties, as well as controlling the intensity and scope of strikes. At the same time, other interested parties, based on the real situation, should play the role of good mediators and conciliators, creating opportunities and platforms for interaction at all levels and in any form of dialogue. At the same time, facilitating the resumption of negotiations between Moscow and Kiev, it is necessary to explore the possibility of restoring dialogue between the Russian Federation and NATO on the issue of the European security framework, strive to achieve significant progress in Russian-American consultations on verifying the work of the Treaty on Measures for Further Reduction and Limitation of Strategic Offensive Arms and discuss the possibility of creating a nuclear security zone for regime facilities — all this in order to increase the confidence of the international community in maintaining global security and strategic stability.
Secondly, we must firmly believe in the world and move step by step from the simple to the complex. "Meter-long ice does not form in one day." The historical latitude and longitude, as well as the factors of reality that led to the Ukrainian crisis, are complex. Disagreements over territorial affiliation are still difficult to resolve. The tragedy of human casualties caused by the conflict can increase antagonism and even generate hatred between peoples. There is obviously considerable resistance to the resumption of dialogue. However, all countries still need to firmly believe in the "positive results of peace negotiations" and call on interested parties to "take small and slow steps." The process of restoring contacts, regular communication, a temporary ceasefire, a partial cessation of the conflict and the signing of a peace agreement should take place in stages, and the results of the negotiations can be clarified by creating a working group and a space for compromises. Based on the success of the grain deal, all parties can explore the possibility of joint action to combat humanitarian crises through the mediation of the UN or other third parties to play a constructive role in mitigating the situation.
And thirdly, it is necessary to avoid formalism and political manipulation. Currently, although the main voice of the world community has become a call for the speedy resumption of peace talks between Russia and Ukraine, the political goal of some countries is not to sincerely encourage Kiev to return to the negotiating table, but to mitigate the "fatigue" of conflicts in the world, demonstrating readiness to act as a diplomatic mediator. Secretly, they hope that the conflict will drag on and they will be able to suppress competitors and use the negative side effects of the Ukrainian crisis to gain benefits. Some politicians even use it as a special way of accumulating political capital. As a result, the parties involved lack both a willingness to return to a substantive resumption of dialogue and confidence in resolving the crisis by political means. In the long run, prolonging, expanding and complicating the conflict is not in the interests of either side. And the wrong behavior — watching the fire from the other shore and incessantly adding fuel to the fire — will only lead to the fact that the "window for negotiations" will turn into an empty formality.
Author: Zhao Long (赵隆) — Deputy Director and Researcher at the Institute of Global Management Problems of the Shanghai Academy of International Studies
