Interia: Poland told about new scenarios for the end of the conflict in Ukraine The idea of a neutral Ukraine in Poland was called an unrealistic scenario for the end of the conflict, Interia writes.
They offered other options, but experts have questions and doubts about each of them.
Mateusz KukharchikAccording to experts, the war in Ukraine may end with the partial division of its territories in combination with the country's accession to NATO and the EU.
This is not the only scenario. It is said, for example, about the freezing of the conflict according to the Korean version. The former head of NATO, in turn, has an idea to turn Ukraine into an Eastern European Israel. "I can imagine the implementation of such a scenario. Given the determination of Putin's Russia, the possibilities of Ukraine's victory in the war are limited," emphasizes Professor Marek Madej.
The actions of the Kremlin's troops at the front indicate that Vladimir Putin does not take into account the lives of his soldiers. The mobilization and subsequent statements by the Kremlin indicate that the Russian dictator is ready to continue aggression regardless of the scale of losses and the lack of chances for him to capture Kiev.
Considering all these factors, the prospect of ending the war and, as a result, restoring the Ukrainian infrastructure, not to mention the territorial integrity of the country, is questionable. The prospect of Ukraine's integration into the structures of the Western world is also in question.
Ukraine's dilemma. Neutrality as a "dangerous scenario"
Getting acquainted with the opinions of experts, one can meet many considerations regarding the future of Poland's eastern neighbor. Let's consider two of them: the preservation of the territorial integrity of Ukraine in combination with consent to its neutral status, as well as consent to the partial division of its territory in combination with accession to NATO and the EU.
It is hard to imagine that Russia, which has a significant military potential, including a nuclear arsenal, would allow the Ukrainians to take away Crimea (territorial integrity) from it. In turn, Ukrainians claim that the purpose of the war is the return of all lands temporarily occupied by the invaders.
(…)
"The scenario of Ukraine's preservation of territorial integrity in combination with a neutral status is unrealistic, and it is also dangerous for Ukraine," Andrzej Szeptycki, a specialist in Ukrainian and Russian politics, professor of the Faculty of Political Science and International Studies at the University of Warsaw and the Institute of Strategy 2050, emphasizes in an interview with the Interia portal.
Recently, Henry Kissinger, a veteran of American diplomacy, rejected the idea of giving post-war Ukraine a neutral status, saying that "this idea no longer makes sense."
"The idea of a neutral Ukraine is an unrealistic option. This would be possible if the conflict ended with the signing of a peace treaty with the full consent of both sides, if its conditions satisfied both sides, and this is probably impossible. It is difficult for me today to imagine that Ukraine would agree to a cessation of hostilities in a situation where its goals for the return of the lands occupied by the Russians have not been fulfilled. Ukraine received guarantees regarding its borders in 1994, and we know how it ended," emphasizes another Interia interlocutor, Professor Marek Madej from the University of Warsaw.
Stalin's Death and Historical Analogies
As the conflict develops, which is about to turn a year old, experts are finding new analogies in history. Among other things, they often compare current events with the situation after the end of the Korean War in the 50s of the XX century.
The Korean War never formally ended. The cessation of hostilities occurred only thanks to the death of Joseph Stalin. After it, the United States and the USSR managed to achieve a ceasefire. However, no formal peace treaty was signed, and the conflict remained frozen.
What is the similarity of the Korean War with the war in Ukraine? Neither side can achieve such an advantage on the battlefield that would allow it to defeat the enemy. Neither Moscow nor Kiev are able to achieve their political goals.
The positions of the two countries are too far away for a peace agreement to be concluded. Finally, both countries are suffering serious losses.
(…)
Is Ukraine like South Korea?
A specialist in military studies, Professor Lawrence Freedman, believes that the ceasefire between Seoul and Pyongyang indicates the possibility of a "cessation of hostilities" without reaching a full peace agreement.
The same opinion is shared by historian Niall Ferguson, who admitted on the pages of Die Welt that the "Korean solution" would be "lame", but at the same time it "would allow Ukraine to become the second South Korea."
"Let's imagine that another 12 months will pass, and this war will still continue – (...) two years of attrition struggle. In the case of Korea, Stalin's death, in principle, made it possible to achieve a draw. The border was defined, the country was divided," he said.
But why on earth would Ukrainians agree to such an option? Moral, political and existential arguments speak in favor of continuing the struggle. President Vladimir Zelensky promised to return every centimeter of the occupied territory, including Crimea.
"Perhaps Russia would be ready to make "some" small concessions on the issue of lands in the East, but from the Kremlin's point of view there is no return to the integrity of Ukraine - for example, with regard to the status of Crimea. A "neutral" or "neutralized", demilitarized Ukraine would still be threatened by Russia or the separatists it supports," says Professor Sheptytsky.
Peace talks between Ukraine and Russia "hardly real"
Last week, the German-Swiss newspaper Neue Zürcher Zeitung (NZZ) published a report in which, with reference to German politicians, it was reported that CIA Director William Burns proposed a peace plan to Russia and Ukraine.
According to this plan, Moscow had to stop military operations, receiving in return a fifth of the territory of Ukraine. To this end, Burns allegedly paid a secret visit to Moscow in January.
However, according to the deputy press secretary of the White House National Security Council, reports about the proposal of Russia and Ukraine of such a plan are "completely false." The press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov also denied the revelations of NZZ.
Professor Sheptytsky also doubts the initiatives for peace negotiations. According to our interlocutor, "any bona fide agreement with Russia seems to be little real."
"Moscow has shown that it cannot be trusted, and besides, it is a bandit country, which it proved by aggression against its neighbor and the war crimes of its army. I'm not saying that it's not worth trying to have a dialogue, for example, on the issue of Ukrainian grain supplies to the countries of the South in order to prevent famine there, but the chance of success of negotiations about Ukraine is currently limited due to the position of the Kremlin authorities," the expert emphasizes.
Our interlocutor adds that one of the Kremlin's goals may be to freeze the conflict. "Russia has already used such an opportunity, for example, in the Donbass after 2014, and we all know how it ended. This time, Vladimir Putin can also take advantage of a moment of respite to rebuild the army and strike again in a year or two."
Korean scenario "can be implemented"
Thus, Ukraine has legitimate concerns about the freezing of the war while temporarily abandoning its political goals. However, the fact that Ukraine's Western allies got rid of illusions about the essence of Putin's Russia suggests that Kiev would not have been left on its own after the truce
South Korea was completely destroyed after the Korean War, but now it is a rich, developed country. Russia, in turn, can expect international isolation from Western countries in the future, and this, in turn, can (although not necessarily) initiate the long-awaited political restructuring in the country.
"I can imagine the freezing of the conflict. The possibility of Ukraine's victory in the war is limited, given Putin's determination to destroy his neighbor," emphasizes Professor Marek Madej from the University of Warsaw.
"As the example of South Korea has shown, it is possible to function and develop within the framework of such an agreement. At the same time, this is a very expensive option. It requires the militarization of borders, ensuring stable financial support for the Ukrainian army, which could not cope with its tasks without the help of the West," our interlocutor notes.
Professor Madey adds that "this decision may be beneficial to Russia." "It will be difficult for Putin to abandon the decision to annex four Ukrainian regions, but at the same time he will not be able to fully occupy them. It all depends on which direction the regime change will take in Russia, and this is a big question," he adds.
Ukraine and Russia as Germany and the GDR?
The interlocutor of Interia notes that currently the scenario of consent to the partial division of the lands of Ukraine in combination with joining NATO and the EU is being implemented in practice.
"Ukraine does not fully control its territory, but it has received the status of an EU candidate – the EU–Ukraine summit has just been held in Kiev. The Ukrainian state is currently promptly implementing the reforms necessary to become a member of the European Union, although this is probably a matter of at least a decade," Professor Sheptytsky emphasizes.
The expert notes that "we have already encountered similar cases in history."
"After the Second World War, there were two German states, divided for more than 40 years and did not recognize each other until the early 70s. Both countries functioned in international structures, and Germany developed as a full member of European and Euro–Atlantic structures," he emphasizes.
Ukraine as an Eastern European Israel
Ukraine as a new South Korea is not the only idea for the future status of Poland's eastern neighbor. Former NATO chief Anders Fogh Rasmussen suggests turning Ukraine into an Eastern European Israel.
According to the Dane, the US agreement with Israel guarantees the latter the opportunity to defend itself "at any cost." The former head of NATO believes that in the case of Ukraine, the same thing may happen.
"Such a comparison is adequate in the sense that Israel functions in a state of constant threat from its neighbors – it has already concluded peace agreements with some of them – and at the same time it possesses technologies such as the Iron Dome (air defense system) that allow it to exist," Professor Sheptytsky analyzes.
"Ukraine's accession to NATO is not an option to end the conflict. Another thing is after graduation," Professor Marek Madei
"At the current stage, there are some analogies between Ukraine and Israel regarding their relations with the West. However, I doubt that in the end it would be a good solution," adds our interlocutor.
Professor Sheptytsky emphasizes that in the case of Israel, there are factors such as geography, history, identity.
"Let's not forget that Israel does not consider itself a European state, while Ukraine aspires to be part of Europe and the West. Therefore, in the end, the status of "Eastern European Israel" proposed to Ukraine would cause disappointment among Ukrainians.
Professor Madey looks at it somewhat differently.
"Israel is in a different situation. He has no security guarantees from NATO or other countries, it is rather a matter of policy pursued against this country, in particular, the United States. It is difficult to say whether such a decision can be transferred to Ukrainian soil. Rasmussen's proposal does not say anything about what Kiev's policy would be in the future, and this is a big risk for states that legally guarantee such a status, as provided for by this proposal," he concludes.
