When the world gets closer.

We help you see farther.

Sign up to our expressly international daily newsletter.

Already a subscriber? Log in .

You've reached your limit of one free article.

Get unlimited access to Worldcrunch

You can cancel anytime .

SUBSCRIBERS BENEFITS

Exclusive International news coverage

Ad-free experience NEW

Weekly digital Magazine NEW

9 daily & weekly Newsletters

Access to Worldcrunch archives

Free trial

30-days free access, then $2.90
per month.

Annual Access BEST VALUE

$19.90 per year, save $14.90 compared to monthly billing.save $14.90.

Subscribe to Worldcrunch
Geopolitics

Russia And Ukraine, The Meaning Of A Bad Status Quo

Despite being parties of one conflict and neighbors and comrades of the same historical events, it is now obvious that Russia and Ukraine — or at least their very different leaders, Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelensky — are living in opposing realities.

Photo of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky and Russian President Vladimir Putin at a summit in Paris in December 2019

Ukraine's Zelensky and Russia's Putin in Paris in Dec. 2019

Anna Akage

-Analysis-

The best we can say about the recent visits of U.S. Undersecretary of State Victoria Nuland to Moscow with top European officials Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel to Kyiv was that these high-level meetings ensured the status quo in the longstanding Russia-Ukraine conflict.

But that is a status quo measured in dead negotiations in the Normandy Format over the simmering war on the border and the status of Crimea. It is status quo of the shared disapproval of the situation, and the clarity of the opposing directions chosen by Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky.


Why continue to talk about the same problem, if the parties are seeking opposite solutions.

As seen by Putin

Moscow has achieved what it wanted: Direct negotiations with the Americans regarding Ukraine have now been resumed. Notably, the request for Nuland's meeting with his Russian counterparts came directly from Washington. It was their initiative and, as Nuland put it, the aim was to construct "stable and predictable relations."

To make it possible, the Russians lifted sanctions on Nuland, just as the Americans spared a number of Russian diplomats from punitive measures.

And it is the U.S., not the EU, that Putin wants to negotiate with; it was a direct link that was written between the lines in Dmitriy Medvedev's recent article. Any direct dialogue between Putin and Zelensky will not happen until there is no sign of a more pro-Russian attitude in Kyiv.

The troubles in our bilateral relations are currently too big.

The key task with which Nuland is traveling is the resumption of regular dialogue between Moscow and Washington on the so-called Ukrainian issue. But other meetings are also taking place, including those with Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov and with Russian presidential aide Yuri Ushakov. During these talks, various issues are likely to be raised: the situation in Central Asia, the deployment of U.S. military personnel at Russian bases, China and the situation in Southeast Asia, as well as other regions of the world.

Moscow cast this high-ranking visit in a cool manner: "We shouldn't complain that we can't reach any breakthrough agreements right away. It's hardly possible. The troubles in our bilateral relations are currently too big. They cannot be sorted out at once," said the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation Dmitry Peskov. At the same time, the State Department called Ms. Nuland's talks in Moscow "constructive."

Photo of President of the European Council \u200bCharles Michel, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, and President of the European Commission Ursula von der Leyen in Kiev on Oct. 12

Charles Michel, Volodymyr Zelensky and Ursula von der Leyen in Kiev on Oct. 12

Celestino Arce Lavin/ZUMA

As seen by Zelensky 

Hopes and demands are what's guiding the Ukrainian president. Still Zelensky must contend with the fact that from Moscow he's seen as not a fully autonomous figure and from the European Union as a little boy who can wait.

Zelensky is eager to negotiate with his Russian counterpart; he talks almost every week about the need to meet with Putin either one-on-one or in the Normandy format.

But the negotiations are on hold — just as they were during the presidency of his predecessor, Petro Poroshenko. Angela Merkel and Emmanuel Macron only have to listen to the Ukrainian and Russian leaders accusing each other of violating the Minsk agreements and the Paris communiqué. It has already gotten to the point where the Germans and the French are begging Putin to resume normal negotiations between the foreign ministers.

Brussels remains Kyiv's closest ally. Such were assurances from the heads of the European Commission and the European Council, Ursula von der Leyen and Charles Michel respectively in the latest meetings in the Ukrainian capital.

One positive breakthrough was the signing of the Open Skies agreement, which Ukraine has been waiting eight years for. But European guests gave no guarantees regarding the most important issues: prospects of membership in the European Union and energy security. "Where is that finish line, and is there a finish line?" Zelensky said, describing the essence of his complaints to European officials.

Nord Stream 2 guarantees

On the other side, relations with Washington seem almost perfect: Victoria Nuland is spoken to all the time, communicating both at the level of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry and at the level of Bankova. U.S. officials inform their Ukrainian counterparts of the details of negotiations with their Russian counterparts. The problem lies in something else: the quality of communication.

U.S. can and will use the Ukrainian issue to get some concessions from the Russians.

The Ukrainian side is sure that the Americans share all their information, that Kyiv knows everything about what is going on in the Russian-American track. But one may recall here the recent situation when the Americans and Germans signed a framework agreement on guarantees for Nord Stream 2 behind the backs of their Ukrainian counterparts. All this was done to appease Russian-friendly business and get closer to Moscow.

The broader reality is that the U.S. can and will use the Ukrainian issue to get some concessions from the Russians in areas that are important to them. Nobody knows what that means for Kyiv in the long run. In the short run, no doubt, it means more bad stability.

From Your Site Articles
Related Articles Around the Web

You've reached your limit of free articles.

To read the full story, start your free trial today.

Get unlimited access. Cancel anytime.

Exclusive coverage from the world's top sources, in English for the first time.

Insights from the widest range of perspectives, languages and countries.

FOCUS: Russia-Ukraine War

Putinism Without Putin? USSR 2.0? Clean Slate? How Kremlin Succession Will Play Out

Since Russia's invasion of Ukraine, political commentators have consistently returned to the question of Putin's successor. Russia expert Andreas Umland foreshadows a potentially tumultuous transition, resulting in a new power regime. Whether this is more or less democratic than the current Putinist system, is difficult to predict.

A kid holds up a sign with Putin's photograph over the Russian flag

Gathering in Moscow to congratulate Russia's President Vladimir Putin on his birthday.

TASS/ZUMA
Andreas Umland

-Analysis-

STOCKHOLM — The Kremlin recently hinted that Vladimir Putin may remain as Russia's president until 2030. After the Constitution of the Russian Federation was amended in 2020, he may even extend his rule until 2036.

For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.

However, it seems unlikely that Putin will remain in power for another decade. Too many risks have accumulated recently to count on a long gerontocratic rule for him and his entourage.

The most obvious and immediate risk factor for Putin's rule is the Russian-Ukrainian war. If Russia loses, the legitimacy of Putin and his regime will be threatened and they will likely collapse.

The rapid annexation of Crimea without hostilities in 2014 will ultimately be seen as the apex of his rule. Conversely, a protracted and bloody loss of the peninsula would be its nadir and probable demise.

Additional risk factors for the current Russian regime are related to further external challenges, for example, in the Caucasus. Other potentially dangerous factors for Putin are economic problems and their social consequences, environmental and industrial disasters, and domestic political instability.

Keep reading...Show less

The latest