PARLEY

Will the U.S.’s changed Ukraine policy end the Russia-Ukraine war?
1 of 5 U.S Secretary of State Marco Rubio (right) shakes hands with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov in Riyadh,


Saudi Arabia. - Photo: AFP

The decision to end this war will have to be taken by countries who are the
primary actors in this matter and ultimately everyone knows that this is a
proxy war of NATO versus Russia in Ukraine. It’s not a war between Russia
and Ukraine, though Ukraine has a big role to play.
- ANURADHA CHENOY

On February 18, U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio met Russian Foreign Minister Sergey
Lavrov in Riyadh. This was a dramatic reversal of the previous U.S. administration’s policy of not
having peace talks with Russia since the beginning of Russia’s war with Ukraine in February
2022. The reversal took place because of Donald Trump’s election campaign, in which he called
for “ending the war in Ukraine”. Since taking office, President Trump has spoken on phone with
Russian President Vladimir Putin and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who is also
criticised on the platform Truth Social. Will the U.S.’s changed Ukraine policy end the Russia-
Ukraine war? Kanwal Sibal and Anuradha Chenoy discuss the question in a conversation
moderated by Kallol Bhattacherjee. Edited excerpts:
Is U.S. President Donald Trump’s peace overture to Russia a well-thought-out design or is it
being driven by domestic dynamics?
Kanwal Sibal: Donald Trump is unpredictable and he could still swing a surprise. He may
change or modify his position and go in a different direction depending on whether he feels
that he’s getting what he wants.
Having said that, he has taken a position on Russia and has actually begun a dialogue with
Russia, which hasn’t existed for the last three years. He has reversed the U.S.’s position on
having a dialogue with Russia and on finding a peaceful way out. His principal advisers,
whether the Secretary of State or the National Security Adviser, or even the Defence Secretary,
have made clear statements about their views.
Meanwhile, Mr. Trump has been pretty harsh towards Volodymyr Zelenskyy. He has called him
a ‘dictator’. He thinks Mr. Zelenskyy needs to legitimise himself by organising elections in
Ukraine, which has been Russia’s demand too. He says the U.S. has pumped $350 billion into
the war in Ukraine, though that figure is disputed by the Ukranian President. Mr. Trump says
he needs to recover the $350 billion and the way he will do that is by forcing Mr. Zelenskyy to
sign an agreement with the U.S. to allow it to acquire mineral rights in Ukraine. So, basically, he
has reduced it to an economic proposition. But the core issue is not economic; it is the role of
the U.S. in providing security to Europe.
Most importantly, this is the first time that a U.S. President has said that the expansion of
NATO was the reason for the Ukraine conflict.
Anuradha Chenoy: First, Mr. Trump sees the ground reality, which is that Russia is winning the
war. A lot of Ukraine’s military operations have failed. The war is like a black hole and a lot of
American and European money is going into it. The Europeans obviously want the war to
continue. So Mr. Trump is actually managing this defeat in the best way he can. Second,
throughout his election campaign, Mr. Trump had argued for peace. He has got an
overwhelming majority, so he has to please his voters. Third, I think he’s resetting the extractive
engagement of the military industrial complex of the U.S. vis-à-vis Ukraine with the deal for
rare earth minerals. However, we have to remember that much of Ukraine’s mineral wealth is
in the Donbas region, which is already under Russian control. Mr. Trump’s policy indicates a
dramatic shift, and he feels this will be beneficial to American interests.
In 2022, Turkey brokered a deal which was scuttled by the U.S. and the U.K. Can a similar deal
go through this time in Riyadh even if it involves Ukraine suffering loss of territory?
KS: Well, Mr. Zelenskyy had dug his heels in. He’s been very defiant. He has, in fact, insulted Mr.
Trump. The U.S. Vice President said as much when Mr. Zelenskyy alleged that Mr. Trump was
actually purveying Russian disinformation. He claims that he’s got 57% support in Ukraine, but
the fact is that his support levels are exceedingly low. My European sources say the two people
who are standing in the way [of peace talks] are Mr. Zelenskyy and Andriy Yermak, the chief of
the presidential office, who is a hawk.
The issue is, how long can Europe continue to support Mr. Zelenskyy? The Europeans are trying
to convince the U.S. not to abandon Ukraine as it would be a big defeat for Europe.
Mr. Putin visited Saudi Arabia earlier and he enjoys good relations with Saudi Arabia. But at the
end of the day, I feel that as long as Mr. Zelenskyy is there, there will be a problem in forcing a
solution because he can continue to say that he is unwilling to yield territory.
AC: Mr. Trump has many means of convincing the U.K. Prime Minister Keir Starmer, Mr.
Zelenskyy, and the leaders of the European Union, who are all against a peace deal. Because
the choice before Mr. Zelenskyy is to either agree to what Mr. Trump is putting forth or to face
a complete collapse on the battlefield. That is the reality. The minute Mr. Trump withdraws
funding, Ukraine will collapse. So, it is a choice between the devil and the deep blue sea, and
Mr. Zelenskyy have to take one.
I think the easier one is to go with Mr. Trump’s plan because there at least he can ask the U.S.
for some security guarantee for the Ukraine that is left after giving up territory to Russia. Plus,
he can hope for some economic deals and some reconstruction.
In comparison, Mr. Putin is clear. As there is no ceasefire yet, the Russian troops will continue
to advance. I went to Moscow recently and people are very tough. They feel this is an
existential conflict which they have to win. At the same time, they don’t want to give up too
much of what they already have.
Why is it so difficult to find a solution to this war despite such a compelling humanitarian
argument — the war has reportedly cost around one million lives and caused massive
displacement in Ukraine.
KS: Ukraine is under martial law, so people can’t express their opinion freely. The problem of
Ukraine came out clearly from Marco Rubio, who, in his Congressional hearing, said the
problem of Ukraine is not that it lacks weapons; it is that it lacks manpower. A lot of Ukrainian
lives have been lost. On the Russian side, the number of casualties and the number of injured
is around 2,00,000. Ukraine is fighting a losing battle but more tragically, there is no way to
actually gauge public opinion there. Life is more or less normal in Kyiv but that is a strategy to
display normalcy in the capital. The war is also raging because of the ultra-nationalist and neo-
Nazi groups who had caused tension during the Soviet era. So long as these people are in
power — and they came to power after the Maidan coup (in 2014) — they will continue to resist
any peaceful settlement with Russia, unless of course they have no choice and they are
compelled to do so.
AC: Every major country including India and China wanted this war to stop and they were also
willing to give their good offices to ensure a quick end to this conflict. In fact, Prime Minister
Narendra Modi had said to President Putin that this is not the time for war. But the decision to
end this war will have to be taken by countries who are the primary actors in this matter and
ultimately everyone knows that this is a proxy war of NATO versus Russia in Ukraine. It’s not a
war between Russia and Ukraine, though Ukraine has a big role to play.
This invasion would probably not have happened if Minsk 1 and Minsk 2 had been adhered to
and if that 2022 agreement that Turkey had mediated had come about. This conflict could have
been avoided if the Russians in the Donbas area had not been discriminated against and
denied their religion, their language, and their culture.
Ironically, Mr. Zelenskyy, who fought his election campaign on the platform of peace, himself
fell for this strategic calculation of NATO versus Russia, which has led to major losses on the
ground. Major Ukrainian units and brigades have faced great casualties. The Ukrainian men
have lost their appetite for this war. Of course they are patriotic and they have done their best,
but to me it seems like a very useless war and it needs to end.
Why are the peace talks happening in Riyadh and not in India? Did India miss a chance to
mediate?
AC: Earlier these peace talks used to be in Helsinki and Brussels and Geneva. Now, suddenly,
they are in Riyadh, which has shocked the European Union and perhaps the rest of the world. I
think India has played its role very well in this, to the extent that it could, by being neutral and
critiquing the sanctions and being a good ally of the Russians. The Russians will not forget it
and the reset in Russia-U.S. ties will be of great benefit to India. Europe will be the clear loser. I
think India will be a winner and that Mr. Trump sees India as a very close ally of Russia.

TO LISTEN TO THE FULL INTERVIEW

SCAN THE CODE OR GO TO THE LINK

WWW.THEHINDU.COM