Ukraine’s offensive could set stage for diplomacy with Russia, US officials say
Sign up now: Get ST's newsletters delivered to your inbox
Ukrainian leaders also say they will not agree to talks until they have pushed back Russian forces.
PHOTO: NYTIMES
Follow topic:
WASHINGTON - Ukraine’s planned counteroffensive against Russia has overshadowed talk of a potential negotiated settlement in the conflict, but some US and European officials say the next phase of the war could create momentum for diplomacy.
It is unclear how the officials will define success in the counteroffensive, which could last many months, or how its outcome might affect their approach. Opinions range widely among military strategists about whether Ukraine is likely to regain territory after more than a year of war.
For now, President Vladimir Putin of Russia has shown no signs of wanting to make concessions or engage in meaningful dialogue.
And US officials remain wary of any calls for an immediate ceasefire or peace talks, especially those coming from China.
Beijing persists at trying to play peacemaker,
Some European officials meeting with Mr Qin have expressed scepticism. And in Washington, US Secretary of State Antony Blinken met with his counterparts from Britain and Spain this week to shore up commitments to military aid to Ukraine,
Mr Blinken said on Tuesday at a news conference with Mr James Cleverly, the British foreign secretary, that the Ukrainians have “what they need to continue to be successful in regaining territory that was seized by force by Russia over the last 14 months.”
Like Mr Blinken, Mr Cleverly did not mention diplomacy with Russia at all, instead focusing on military aid: “We need to continue to support them, irrespective of whether this forthcoming offensive generates huge gains on the battlefield, because until this conflict is resolved and resolved properly, it is not over.”
Ukrainian leaders also say they will not agree to talks until they have pushed back Russian forces.
Still, US President Joe Biden’s aides have been exploring potential endgames, trying to identify an outcome that could be acceptable to both Ukraine and Russia if real peace talks started, US officials say.
“I know that senior-level administration officials are regularly having conversations about what peace ultimately would look like with our Ukrainian counterparts,” said Representative Adam Smith of Washington, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, “while at the same time having conversations about how to arm them and win back as much territory as possible.”
Mr Biden’s aides and European officials say their best hope is for Ukraine to make substantial gains during the counteroffensive, which would give it more leverage in any negotiations.
But whatever its leaders may think, US officials say that most Ukrainians have little appetite for compromise with their Russian attackers.
And US officials fear that even if Russia’s military suffers more setbacks this summer, Mr Putin may still believe he can win a war of attrition.
Ms Avril Haines, the director of national intelligence, said in congressional testimony last week that while Mr Putin was “scaling back his near-term ambitions” in Ukraine, the chance of Russian concessions at any negotiating table this year “will be low.”
China has pushed for a mediator role since it unveiled a vague peace initiative in February.
Although Mr Blinken and some top European diplomats say they are open to the possibility of China playing a helpful role in the future, they criticise Beijing for not publicly recognising Russia as the aggressor in the war.
Mr Xi Jinping, China’s leader, made a state visit to Moscow in March and voiced continued support for his nation’s partnership with Russia, which the two governments said had “no limits” just before Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022.
China’s special envoy for its peace initiative, Mr Li Hui, was the ambassador to Russia for 10 years and received a medal from Mr Putin.
US and European officials are also suspicious of calls for peace talks that do not include a demand that the Russian military first withdraw from Ukrainian territory, which is the position of President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine.
China has not taken an explicit position on Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and US officials say China and Russia might use the pretence of talks to freeze the frontlines – and Russian gains.
In her congressional testimony, Ms Haines said Mr Putin could use a ceasefire to try to regain strength while “buying time for what he hopes will be an erosion of Western support for Ukraine.”
She added that “he may be willing to claim at least a temporary victory based on roughly the territory he has occupied.”
The debate in Washington over potential peace talks is amorphous and paradoxical. There are even competing arguments based on the same hypothetical outcome: If Ukraine makes substantial gains, that might mean it is time for talks, some officials say – or it could mean Ukraine should put diplomacy on the back burner and keep fighting.
If Ukraine is unable to seize significant territory, some US and European officials might want to nudge Mr Zelensky toward a negotiated settlement.
“The dynamic will shift even if Ukraine makes marginal gains,” said Mr Smith, the Democratic lawmaker. After several more months of war, he predicted, both sides will be exhausted.
But some officials and analysts in Washington caution against such thinking.
“There’s always been a desire among some people in Washington to say, look, if Ukraine doesn’t make gains – or if they do – it might be time to have a conversation about Ukraine looking for a settlement,” said Ms Alina Polyakova, the president of the Centre for European Policy Analysis.
“I personally find that shocking,” she added. “Territorial concessions would validate Russia’s aggression, which sets a global precedent for China and others that such means work. Two, it would also mean that the West would have to accept the moral implications – accepting war crimes and condoning continued human rights abuses.”
Among top US officials, General Mark Milley, the chair of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, has been the most outspoken on the need for Ukraine and Russia to consider negotiations, arguing that a prolonged war would result in many more casualties.
Mr Blinken has taken a different position. “There has to be some profound change in Mr Putin’s mind and in Russia’s mind to engage in meaningful diplomacy,” he said last week. NYTIMES
