Following Trump’s Feb. 12 conversations, one with Russian President Vladimir Putin and the other with Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky, the stage was set for substantive talks aimed at ending three years of misery that began with the Kremlin’s unprovoked invasion Feb. 24, 2022.
Peace Talks Begin
The peace talks began on Feb. 18 in the Saudi Arabian capital of Riyadh at the Diriyah Palace. Secretary of State Marco Rubio, National Security Advisor Mike Waltz, and Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff represented the United States. They were joined by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the perennial face of the Kremlin’s foreign policy team, and Aide to the President Yuri Ushakov.
A US State Department readout explained that “President Trump wants to stop the killing; the United States wants peace and is using its strength in the world to bring countries together.” The statement continued with the observation that Trump “is the only leader in the world who can get Ukraine and Russia to agree” to a peace pact. Regardless of who is at fault for the aggression, neither of the two belligerents trusts the other. Buildling trust between Washington and Moscow will be a steep hill to climb, so it makes sense to take on this challenge first.
To that end, the talks resulted in four trust-building steps. The US negotiators announced that they had decided to:
- “Establish a consultation mechanism to address irritants to our bilateral relationship with the objective of taking steps necessary to normalize the operation of our respective diplomatic missions.
- “Appoint respective high-level teams to begin working on a path to ending the conflict in Ukraine as soon as possible in a way that is enduring, sustainable, and acceptable to all sides.
- “Lay the groundwork for future cooperation on matters of mutual geopolitical interest and historic economic and investment opportunities which will emerge from a successful end to the conflict in Ukraine.
- “[P]ledge to remain engaged to make sure the process moves forward in a timely and productive manner.”
The State Department was clear in setting appropriate expectations for any rapid, permanent end to the destruction and bloodshed in Ukraine. “One phone call followed by one meeting is not sufficient to establish enduring peace. We must take action, and today, we took an important step forward.”
Soon after the meeting concluded, the US contingent met with journalists from CNN News and the Associated Press. A question posed was about how the Ukrainians and Europeans “feel” shut out of the peace process as it has unfolded. In response, Rubio offered a dose of reality absent from the previous administration’s relationship with the Kyiv government and European leaders: “Well, the comment I would have on that is that for three and a half years while this conflict has raged … no one else has been able to bring something together like what we saw today because Donald Trump is the only leader in the world that can. So, no one is being sidelined here.”
Soon after the meeting concluded, the US contingent met with journalists from CNN News and the Associated Press. A question posed was about how the Ukrainians and Europeans “feel” shut out of the peace process as it has unfolded. In response, Rubio offered a dose of reality absent from the previous administration’s relationship with the Kyiv government and European leaders: “Well, the comment I would have on that is that for three and a half years while this conflict has raged … no one else has been able to bring something together like what we saw today because Donald Trump is the only leader in the world that can. So, no one is being sidelined here.”
Ukraine and Europeans Worried About Being Left Out
To assuage the fears of the Europeans and Ukraine that they are not represented, Waltz offered, “Look, it’s common sense. If you’re going to bring both sides together, you have to talk to both sides.” However, for the first meeting to establish confidence, having diplomats by the score, all pushing their country’s particular agenda, would have been a waste of time. Furthermore, candid and transparent, “Rubio said a negotiation process had not begun in earnest, and if talks advanced, the Ukrainians and other Europeans would be brought in the fold,” Reuters reported.
A key player with the most skin in the game is not convinced. RealClearPolitics quoted Zelensky in a Meet the Press interview about assurances that Ukraine’s position would be protected. He declared, “So, I will never accept any decisions between the United States and Russia about Ukraine. Never. And our people, never.” His passion is understandable — the Ukrainians have lost hundreds of thousands of soldiers and citizens to a brutal Russian war machine. Nonetheless, never say never.
When it comes to bringing peace to Ukraine, if not the United States, who? If not now, when? The previous administration and European leaders presided over a protracted conflict with no end in sight. It’s time for something different.
Dave is a retired U.S. Air Force Pilot with over 180 combat missions in Vietnam. He is the former Principal Deputy Under Secretary of Defense, Comptroller and has served in executive positions in the private sector aerospace and defense industry. This article was first published HERE
15 comments:
Your statement that it was an unprovoked attack by the Kremlin on the Ukraine is worthy of discussion. There were many players that bought about this war and non more so than US involvement in NATO dating back to “not another inch closer”
I have a great deal of confidence that there is good chemistry between Putin and Trump unlike his compromised predecessors that did the world no favours.
Tell the Yanks to bugger off and go and interfere in some South American banana republic's business, dismantle NATO 34 years after its expiry date, and let us Europeans solve the problem of Ukraine. Positive outcome guaranteed.
Of course the US should be leading peace talks. It's okay for them to be supplying weapons but to try and solve the conflict "not okay?" That's plain silly. The US needs to be seen to be the leader of the free world again. If Europe wants to solve the problem why haven't they done so? We also need the US to play a role in the Pacific.
Isn’t that the outcome Trump has been trying to achieve all along Barend .
This war has always been Europe’s problem but you appear to be the first European willing to acknowledge it as such.
NATO has proved to be a bunch of freeloaders almost since inception - talking tough but never prepared to do the heavy lifting, while leaving it to the US.
Trump says “ enough”. His main commitment is now to protecting those countries like us who live in the Indo
/ Pacific region where China is having a field day. Just note the 3 Chinese warships off the Australian Coast like a fox in the hen house eyeing up the next tasty meal.
Yet all this outrage that Trump should be responsible for sorting out the Ukrainian war before leaving is just so much feigned hypocrisy.
We here in the South Pacific should be breathing a sigh of relief that the US is like the cavalry about to come over the hill.
Thank God for that.
No, it's not OK for them to throw more fuel on the fire by supplying weapons. They and their proxy in the guise of NATO are largely responsible for this conflict. Pretending to offer solutions to a problem one has created oneself is what is 'plain silly'.
Many leaders in Western Europe remain locked in a Cold War mentality vis-a-vis Russia. In Eastern Europe it's a different story. Fortunately, more and more right-wingers in Europe are coming round to the realisation that we need to get the Yanks out of our business and get Moscow on side as a counterweight to both US and Chinese bullying. We need to 'Make Europe Great Again!'
You're absolutely right about the Pacific and China, Clive. No disagreement there. But Europe is a very different kettle of fish.
Forcing a language (Ukrainian) on a traditional Russian speaking territory reaped the consequences - a lesson NZ mighty well absorb.
Breaching contract i.e the Minsk accord, was a euro backed decision. Merkle admitted that it had merely been a ploy.
USA China and Russia are to be to lose any war.
Sanctions, as the Euros and Poms now come to realise, are counter productive.
EU is a false empire -it is already dying. It wont last.
Euro masses a sick and tired of Ukraine refuges - and want to be self first.
Ukraine always has been rife with corruption - not to say USA and Russia and China and NZ are not - but Ukraine has its special mixture.
Ukraine will take decade to rebuild infrastructure and homes. Who will pay and why -because there are no people anymore - who will g back to that mess - and in the corn fields for the next century, fear stepping on a land mine - a parting gift from Biden.
Zielinski is a dead man walking. He needs a bolt hole where he can take his ill gotten gains.
The proposal for a peace settlement to be hammered out by Russia and the U S, without Ukraine and European countries is nonsense. Shades here of Munich in 1938 where a settlement was reached involving a large part of Czechoslovakia being transferred to Hitler’s Reich in the absence of the Czechoslovakian leader. Look what it took to restore the national boundary integrity. There can be no other honorable settlement of this war than the removal by Putin of all Russian forces from Ukraine, and a commitment by Russia to help rebuild the country. Those thousands of dead Ukrainians, and Russians for the matter, have gone forever. This invasion was an unprovoked act of aggression, and it has been a disaster. And Ukraine, as a sovereign country, has the right to apply for NATO membership, and be considered.
The demands by Trump for the mineral resources is outragious. He’s now talking of shutting down the internet to Ukraine if it doesn’t dance to his tune. The military assistance given by Biden was to help Ukraine defend its land. Other than that, there were no strings attached. This new Trump demand in then just an ex post facto condition; utterly dishonorable.
This anti-NATO sentient forgets that NATO has insured European peace since 1945, until this invasion. NATO was founded on American participation – in 1949 Europe was still picking itself up after the war and staring down the barrel of the Red Army in the east. Yes, Trump was right in calling for a greater contribution by the European members, but why through the baby out with the bath water?
Isn’t it ironic that we are all getting our knickers in a twist because Trump says he expects Europe to take a dominant role in protecting its own borders.
My understanding is that he is prepared to stay in NATO as a leading defender of that part of the Free World but his condition for doing so is simply that European members are willing to pay their fair share of the cost of their own defence.
It can’t and won’t continue as it has in the past, leaving it all to Uncle Sam.
Why the heartache and expressions of betrayal when the reality is businesses as usual with a few strings attached.
Down here in a Pacific under real threat from a much more powerful aggressor, wouldn’t we be happy to accept those terms before the ink was dry. Fortunately our Defence Minister understands reality and recognises New Zealand has to do a lot more if it is to effectively be pulling its own weight.
Time to get real.
Ukraine has stated it would be very easy to reactivate it's nuclear weapons programme. They still have the scientists, fuel and industrial base.
And now the have domestically produced missiles.
Readers should remember that both phases of the current invasion occurred under Democrat Presidents - Crimea under Obama and the rest of Ukraine under Biden.
Both talked tough but refused to put troops on the ground and planes in the air in defence of Ukraine which they could have done if they were serious about stopping Putin in his tracks.
NATO by itself has never been the reason why peace has prevailed in Europe since WWII - it has been the United States membership and preparedness to send its own forces into battle that has been the effective deterrent against aggressors.
All through the Cold War and finally during the collapse of the Soviet Union, Russian aggressive instincts were matched by a superior force in the form of the US military. NATO has become only a bit player.
European freedoms have always been protected by a dominant USA.
The reason why rogue states like Russia, China and Iran have controlled so many theatres of influence during the last two decades is because the US military has been allowed to be run down by successive governments who have appeased the aggressors rather than confront them.
Trump is now trying to regain the moral and military high ground the US has lost during years of Woke leadership.
It is in everybody’s interests that he succeeds.
Problem MZ Collins has, is, that NZ hardly has the capacity defend its own economic zone from pirate fishers, nor provide rescue relief to neighbour Pacific Islands.
That's where Hon Her's focus should be,
Afterall, China is not going to invade NZ by the barrel of a gun.
America and Russia have displayed that penchant - not China - which already owns Remuera and CBD Auckland AND as another example; almost every acre of forest on the East Coast is Asian Chinese owned: Hikurangi and Ernslaw - the two forestry giants dominating NZ - are NOT NZ owned
Crusher should cut the BullXXXX jellybeans and focus on getting our military into a condition to deliver protection of our economic zone.
NZ will never make any difference to a major outbreak of war.
Time to stop ready WW2 comics.
Only a fool or a liar would claim that the Ukraine war was unprovoked. The US and the US-backed Ukrainian government spent the preceding 8 years killing ethnic Russians in eastern Ukraine.The amazing thing is that it took Putin nearly a decade to finally put his foot down. After nearly three years fighting an economic and military campaign against Russia, the US has been defeated. Now it needs a way out so that it can direct its attentions and resources towards its next war for Israel, this time against Iran.
It find it laughable that all these commentators think there is some sort of principled thinking or policy logic behind Trump's approach to Ukraine. Seems to me quite the opposite. There is no principle and no policy. The only motive is retribution. Zelenskyy defied Trump back in 2016 when Trump tried to blackmail him over Hunter Biden's behaviour. Everything we are seeing play out today is sheer vindictive payback by Trump. If he can pick up a few lithium mines along the way, then that's a bonus. He can add them to his beach-front property portfolio in Gaza. Isn't it great to be able to enjoy the spoils of war without actually fighting a war.
And as for those wishful thinkers who want the US to turn their attention to the Pacific, think again. We have nothing to sell the US that would interest them in helping defend us from aggression. And besides, that will only be an issue when China moves against Taiwan, and I do not believe Trump would hesitate to betray the Taiwanese in exactly the same way he betrayed Ukraine. The only thing Taiwan has that the US wants is their world-leading microchip industry and the US will not get their hands on that because it would be the first civilian infrastructure the Chinese will destroy. While Trump is in charge, we cannot trust the US to honour any agreements they might have with us, so the more distance we can put between them and us the better.
I question Clive Bibby’s credentials to comment on this war, given the nonsense he wrote about it in this newsletter within two days of the invasion three years go. (It’s on the BV archive.)
How’s this? “Moscow’s dictator has clearly been banking on NATO offering nothing more than loud barracking and finger wagging from the sidelines. Sadly, that will not be enough to thwart Putin in his attempt to annex the whole country. No one should be surprised by the invasion. From a Russian perspective it is all going according to plan. In my humble opinion, the blood of all courageous Ukrainians sacrificed in defence of their homeland will be on Biden’s hands as much as the aggressor in this conflict. That’s what you get when you choose a clown to lead the Free World.”
From the start of the war to this year the total level of military assistance provided by the US since the start of the Biden administration stood at $66.5 billion. And for this Trump has not offered single word of support. Now he says that he will bring the war to an end, and, according to his VP, Putin will get to keep much of the territory he has conquered – and wreaked in the process - and the U S will bet to mine the rare minerals.
Bibby also claimed that Putin had the right to object to a NATO country to be on Russia’s border, (Ukraine was considering seeking membership), apparently unaware then that two Baltic countries bordering Russia had been members of NATO for a decade, and since, Finland has joined with 1,300 kms of border.
Given that Russia is no longer a global military force – this war has proved that – and with a GDP miles below the US and China, and even below Japan, Germany, France, the U K, and South Korea, it is hard to understand that Trump is so much in the thrall of Putin. One could almost think that Putin has some serious dirt on him. Some think that he has.
Post a Comment