1. The fifth round of peace talks will be held in Switzerland
Every war ends with negotiations and finally peace. The war in Ukraine is no exception to that. Despite the failure of the negotiations in Istanbul, Ukraine decided to come up with its own peace plan, today known as Zelensky’s peace plan consisting of 10 points. The plan was discussed at four meetings last summer in Copenhagen, Jeddah, Malta, and Davos. The main objective was to convince the neutral states, mostly of the Global South, to support the Ukrainian peace plan and use their relations to put pressure on the Kremlin. The results of these meetings can hardly be considered successful. The only tangible result was the participation of China in Jeddah. Beijing, however, withdrew from the peace process, and it most likely will not come back to it. The upcoming meeting, unlike the previous four, aimed to gather the leaders, not only the security advisors of the invited states. This, however, seems to be unviable.
2. Even though the number of participants is high, the level of representation will be low
It is estimated that nearly 100 countries will participate in the summit from the 160 that were invited, but many of the key players will not be represented by their leaders. Ukrainian diplomats have put significant efforts into bringing as many high-level officials to the meeting as possible, but they did not succeed. Not even Ukraine’s most potent patron Joe Biden is expected to participate in the summit. The U.S. will be represented by Kamala Harris. France and Germany are expected to be represented at the highest level, but BRICS members like India and Brazil will be represented at the junior level. Hungary will be represented by Foreign Minister Péter Szijjártó, and Kyiv is overall happy with this despite the skepticism fueled by the tensions between the two neighboring states. The official narrative from Kyiv is that the lack of high-level representatives is no surprise as is quite difficult to gather them all in one venue. On the other hand, there is also a clear message from Zelensky that many states refused to participate or will only participate at the junior level due to threats from Russia.
3. Kyiv shrunk the program of the Summit to 3 points out of the original 10
The Ukrainian peace plan that was presented by President Zelensky has often been criticized as the demands in it, as the New York Times stated after the Davos meeting, “are considered, by analysts and even politicians backing the proposal, to be unreachable given the current balance of forces on the battlefield.” Since the situation on the battlefield hardly changed, and even the closest allies of Ukraine were shocked by the Russian attack on the Kharkiv region, many of the original claims seem even less achievable now, thus it is even harder to persuade the participants of the summit who remained neutral in the conflict to back the Ukrainian plan. The agenda of the peace summit will contain three out of the ten points, the most crucial ones according to Kyiv: nuclear security, food security, and humanitarian matters, which according to Zelensky “include not only the exchange, but also the return of Ukrainian children stolen by Russia and forcibly taken to Russia.” These points indeed can be supported even by the neutral states, but by accepting them the real solution to the conflict cannot be achieved.
4. China will not participate in the summit and instead suggests organizing its own summit backed by Brazil where both Russia and Ukraine will be invited.
On May 23, Brazil and China signed a joint statement regarding the necessity of peace talks to solve the conflict between Moscow and Kyiv. Unlike the ongoing process, the Chinese-Brazilian version of the conference would invite both Russia and Ukraine. The aim here is to prevent a nuclear crisis. For now, at least 26 countries would join the conference and 45 others would support the initiative. Kyiv does not seem thrilled about such activities of Beijing, and this was clear even when the first so-called Chinese peace proposal was presented in February 2023. The biggest issue from the point of view of Ukraine is that the proposed initiative suggests the participation of Russia, and Beijing refuses to negotiate solely based on the Ukrainian formula. The peace formula proposed by Kyiv and the type of resolution of the conflict suggests that the global community of states will agree on a resolution that will later be presented to Moscow, which will be pushed to accept it as it was done with the grain deal in 2022. For now, it does not seem to be feasible. On the other hand, if the peace talks include Russia, but Ukraine refuses to participate, we will end up with two peace plans supported by various groups of states that move parallel to each other without having a crossing point that would allow an end to the killing and devastation in Ukraine.
5. Zelensky banned himself from direct negotiations with Putin’s regime, but at the end of the day, all wars end with a negotiated peace.
In October 2022, President Zelenksy signed a decree that would ban any negotiations with Russia while Putin is in charge. However, it still keeps the door open for negotiations with Russia in general. 18 months before the election, it might have been a plan to support the anti-war wing in Russia to mobilize against Putin in the elections of 2024, but this didn’t work out as Putin will remain in power for the upcoming 6 years. Russia does not exclude the possibility of the negotiations, but it demands the consideration of the realities of the battlefield, thus it will not give up any territories, and the neutrality of Ukraine is still a priority, as it was agreed in Istanbul. Even though Putin declared that in his view Zelensky is not a legitimate president after May 20, if there is a chance for any constructive negotiations, the question of whom to talk to can be bridged. But the initiative must come from Kyiv. In theory, the doors for the negotiations are open, but practically there is no mutual understanding on how the conflict can be solved. It is now clear that neither party has enough military strength to deliver a final devastating blow against the other and solve the conflict by force. The further escalation or direct involvement of NATO would lead to a world war and possible nuclear devastation, while the prolonged way of attrition would bleed out Ukraine. The stalemate of the war now only can be solved at the negotiation table. Negotiations may not solve the crisis, but they at least can stop the killing.
Written by Sándor Seremet