The opinions expressed on this article are these of the writer and don’t signify in any method the editorial place of Euronews.
I consider that the president of Ukraine ought to change his strategy, initially in the direction of the representatives of the Ukrainian political opposition, Wilfried Martens Centre for European Research President Mikuláš Dzurinda writes.
The protracted, attritional battle that Russia has waged in opposition to Ukraine for almost three years has led analysts and political leaders alike to ponder tips on how to finish this battle as quickly as attainable and obtain a long-lasting peace.
More and more, proposals are rising to use a mannequin much like the one applied in Germany after World Battle II. Adapting to Ukraine would imply that it might by no means relinquish the annexed territories, and the West would by no means recognise these territories as Russian.
Nevertheless, Ukraine would settle for the fact that it can not reclaim the occupied territories by power and would decide to a non-violent strategy.
In alternate, Ukraine would demand concrete, not merely symbolic, safety ensures that Russia wouldn’t repeat its aggression in opposition to Ukraine.
Only recently, each Czech President Petr Pavel and outgoing NATO Secretary Normal Jens Stoltenberg have expressed themselves alongside an analogous vein. So, what’s stopping the implementation of such an answer?
I might say that an issue lies within the exaggerated and unrealistic expectations held by Ukrainian residents and a major a part of the democratic world.
It is a frequent phenomenon throughout the political sphere. Unrealistic expectations might be inadvertently cultivated not solely by populists but in addition by well-intentioned politicians who make extreme guarantees to their constituents.
Such expectations pose a major danger, not merely to the politicians who propagate them, however extra importantly to the communities they signify, as these communities might discover themselves on a dangerous path with restricted choices for reversal.
Can we actually make Putin kneel?
It seems that Ukraine has skilled exactly this phenomenon. The preliminary Ukrainian successes, together with the defence of Kyiv in opposition to a blitzkrieg (a fast invasion by Russian airborne troops on the outset of the battle), the defence of Kharkiv, and the next daring counteroffensive, led each Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy and components of the West to expertise euphoria and to foster expectations of a Ukrainian victory over Russia, with Western help.
These expectations included the notion of expelling Russian forces from all occupied territories, together with Crimea.
The West can also be responsible for creating these exaggerated, unrealistic expectations. Some leaders hoped to influence Putin to again down or at the least droop his operation. Within the case of Ukraine, the granting of EU candidate standing was thought of by many to be one thing that was not even on the desk.
Speak of the West’s huge financial and navy superiority additionally contributed to the phantasm that, finally, Putin will kneel.
Nevertheless, it appears to me that President Zelensky additionally made a key mistake by not involving the Ukrainian parliamentary opposition in fixing the issue.
Quite the opposite, there have been stories right here and there that Ukrainian border guards haven’t allowed the chief of the opposition, former President Petro Poroshenko, to depart Ukraine.
The mayor of Kyiv, Vitali Klitschko, has repeatedly expressed his criticism of the president. There aren’t any identified joint negotiations by the broader Ukrainian political management to hunt a standard answer to the important thing problems with the battle.
I consider Zelenskyy ought to do that
And that is how misinformation spreads. For instance, the concept these are numerous nationalist, if not outright fascist, items of Ukrainian fighters who’re stopping President Zelenskyy from making any compromises.
In actuality, it’s the Ukrainian president himself who has manoeuvred himself right into a place the place the opposition is not going to proactively assist him, and his voters may have a tough time understanding a possible change of strategy to ending the battle and thus will even have a tough time accepting any compromise.
Due to this fact, I consider that the president of Ukraine ought to change his strategy, initially in the direction of the representatives of the Ukrainian political opposition.
As a substitute of the pompous world peace summits which might be doomed to failure prematurely, as an alternative of the “victory plans” that President Zelenskyy is presenting to world leaders (which, it appears, are only a new model of older calls for), he ought to organise a peace summit at residence, in Kyiv.
He ought to invite the parliamentary opposition to the negotiating desk, lay his playing cards on it and attempt to discover a broad political consensus amongst Ukrainian leaders in an open dialogue on the long run association of relations with Russia.
Agreeing on needed compromises
Undoubtedly, the worth for such a change in strategy could possibly be a requirement from the opposition to take part within the governance of Ukraine. There can also be different political calls for.
In any case, the upside of such calls for could be substantial: a broad political consensus among the many Ukrainian political elite, which might start to deal with Ukrainian residents in a standard, unified language.
Solely on this method is it attainable to conform to the compromises which might be needed to finish the battle and set up a sustainable peace. On the identical time, these compromises on no account imply capitulation or resignation to part of Ukrainian territory.
Mikuláš Dzurinda is president of Wilfried Martens Centre for European Research, the EPP-affiliated think-tank, and former prime minister of Slovakia.
At Euronews, we consider all views matter. Contact us at view@euronews.com to ship pitches or submissions and be a part of the dialog.