War strategy is a game of chess in which the pieces are dead soldiers. The person fighting on Ukrainian soil shows no indication that the next move could be a peace negotiation. But all wars end the same way, either at the negotiating table surrender, set ceasefire terms, or freeze the conflict. Strategists in Kyiv and Moscow, Brussels and Washington are certainly waiting for all possible moves, including a few steps. game over (late game). Best case scenario, worst case scenario and all in one. Ukraine wants to be expelled from all lands occupied by Russia, Crimea, Donbas, Kherson and Zaporizhia; Russia dreams of a regime change and a stable and effective occupation of the won territories. The most likely option is far from either scenario and will require dialogue, but about what and who is mediating? Will it involve the deployment of blue helmets on a ceasefire line drawn in Donbas? Referendum in Crimea, but is it legal this time?
Peace processes expert and professor of Defense Studies at the Royal Military College of Canada Walter Dorn It visualizes a peace process led by United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres, who has already broken the grain export agreement. Regarding the deployment of blue helmets, he reminds that both sides were already inclined to the presence of armed UN peacekeepers after 2014, but could not agree on which areas they could go. Ukraine, together with the observers of the Special Monitoring Mission of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), requested them at the border with Russia and in the contact zone with Russia.
“They will be under the operational control of the secretary-general and will include personnel from various nationalities, including Europe and the United States, as well as from countries not involved in the conflict, particularly African or Asian countries such as India,” Dorn said. . “The problem is that if either side of a conflict is winning on the battlefield, they are always reluctant to negotiate. The parties do not sit at the table until the fatigue of war comes,” he says.
In peace process terminology, this painful stalemate (painful stillness). He also points Timothy Donay, Wilfrid Laurier University professor and conflict resolution expert: This is when neither side seriously hopes to win and inflict significant losses. Since the summer, Ukraine has taken the initiative and is laying the groundwork for the offensive. He has no incentive to negotiate and wants to drive Russia out of all its territory, including Crimea.
“If the tables turn and the war turns into a ‘painful stalemate’, then it is possible to imagine conditions under which a negotiated solution is possible,” says Donais. “Peace processes almost always involve agreements between sworn enemies, so we cannot rule out that a final agreement can be reached in this case, however distasteful it may be, especially if it involves ‘rewarding’ Russian aggression with territorial concessions. This is how this war can end.”
Donais considers the existence of blue helmets unlikely unless both sides are blocked and bleeding. United Nations peacekeeping operations are not deployed without the “consent of the parties”. “Soldiers will have to position themselves between both sides, and this will create a fait accompli on the ground that will create a demarcation line between Ukrainian and Russian territory and will be the basis for a final agreement,” he explains. It’s hard to think of a UN mission at this point, as neither side would agree on such a demarcation line.
“Considering the current situation, I see zero probability of any path to peace,” he says. Brian OrendDirector of International Studies and Professor of Philosophy at the University of Waterloo (Canada).
Negotiation, ceasefire, peace agreement
Walter Dorn describes the usual flow of the end of all conflict: It begins with negotiations (ongoing or occasional), followed by a ceasefire (while peace talks continue). It can then be expected that the truce will be violated, but that war will not be reached. And finally, a peace treaty. “The elements of a final agreement will be: (1) Russia’s withdrawal to its borders on February 23 (before the status quo) or recognition of Russian control over acquired territories (even if there is no formal change in internationally recognized borders or legal boundaries); (2) Ukraine agrees to give credit to Russian bases in Crimea and to apply the 2 essential provisions of the Minsk agreement. [alto el fuego, retirada de tropas y armamento pesado, elecciones locales]”.
After Russia invaded Ukraine in 2014, the first agreement was reached in Minsk, the capital of Belarus. The ceasefire was broken and renegotiated between Russia, Ukraine and the independent republics of Donetsk and Lugansk to achieve the second, more detailed pressure, with the EU under the leadership of the negotiations OSCE (now invalid to mediate after delivering more than 3,000m euros in arms to kyiv) made).
peninsula of Crimea
Perhaps the most sensitive issue is the Crimean peninsula, as Vladimir Putin sold his annexation (after an illegal referendum) as one of his great historical achievements in 2014. At the same time, Kyiv assured that there would be no peace without the lands of the Tatars, a Turkmen minority.
At the beginning of the war they wandered peace plans that include postponing the final status decisionI. Leaving it out of a deal to promote peace, similar to the way the final status of Jerusalem was delayed in the Oslo accords between Israelis and Palestinians in the 1990s.
In an interview with this newspaper, the expert on russians Mark Galeotti He pointed to another option: a referendum, only this time legal and supervised. “I suspect that once the peace deal arrives, the Russians will allow them to keep Crimea in exchange for another referendum – this time a genuine, internationally administered referendum that locals say they want; “Otherwise, there will be something akin to shared sovereignty,” he said.
Can such a popular referendum help resolve the status of Crimea if neither side can win by arms?
“Both sides will be very hesitant because who will be allowed to vote? Which country’s legislation will be valid in the referendum? says Walter Dorn. “A legal referendum cannot be held unless it is constitutionally authorized by the Ukrainian Parliament, and it seems practically impossible for the Parliament to allow it.”
Timothy Donais is also skeptical. “Not possible under the current circumstances. “As Canadians and Spaniards alike know well, the issue of self-determination is very complex, and national governments are reluctant to allow large portions of their land to secede simply because of the simple fact that the majority votes.” Moreover, After the population movements in Crimea since 2014, demographics will work in Russia’s favor in a new consultation, as many of those who opposed annexation left the scene. A referendum in Crimea would be illegal and would not represent the real will of the people.
Related news