This is the War in Ukraine newsletter. Do you want to receive it in your email? Sign up below.
After more than two months of the Russian invasion, the conflict remains with no sign of an imminent end. The Ukrainians plan to hold out until mid-June, when they could counterattack. The plan is based on the forecast of an increase in arms power.
If, at the beginning of the war, what the United States offered was an escape route for Volodymyr Zelensky to leave the country, the reality is different today. US President Joe Biden opened his coffers with billions of dollars in aid to Ukrainians, who add support.
In addition to weapons and dollars, the US has offered intelligence assistance, according to the New York Times. A newspaper report says that the US military passed on information that allowed the Ukrainians to attack and kill many Russian generals.
“Our military is well aware that the US, UK and NATO as a whole are constantly transmitting intelligence and other parameters to the Ukrainian Armed Forces,” said Dmitri Peskov, a Kremlin spokesman.
With both enemies armed and with no signs of opening a dialogue, the conflict accumulates failures in diplomacy. we talked to Vinicius Rodrigues Vieiraprofessor of international relations at Faap and FGV, who explains why the war seems to have no end.
Why does diplomacy keep failing? Every war is a diplomatic failure. The conflict starts because a country believes that it is possible to resolve the issue from a military point of view. Putin’s Russia did this by invading. She is responsible, but the diplomatic failure belongs to all the actors involved in the negotiations. And Russia did not win as one could imagine in a short time.
And is there currently no pullback movement? No, the scenario today is perfect for the maintenance of conflict. The invader has not yet achieved its objective, and Ukraine has resisted and garnered support it did not have at the beginning. We remind you that the US offered an escape route to President Volodymyr Zelensky in February. Now the situation is different with arms promotion, financial aid from the West.
Why can’t anyone mediate? Few were willing to do this. Turkey, with war in its backyard, tried. Israel stood up, but it was unfeasible. And even Brazil made a proposal, but without success.
None of these countries would be big enough for that. And the European Union, the USA and the United Kingdom are no longer able to put themselves in a condition of mediator. China could be that actor, but in practice it is taking Russia’s side, which leaves the scenario as it is, without a moderator intermediary.
Do not get lost
We recall the failed attempts at dialogue between Ukraine and Russia so far. the reporter from Sheet Igor Gielow tells how, where and when countries sat down to talk.
Turkey – There was a high-profile meeting in Antalya (Turkey) between Chancellors Lavrov and Kuleba on 10 March, rounds of video chats followed, and a larger meeting in Istanbul, mediated by Erdogan, on 29 and 30 March.
Online – Since March, it’s been just video chats, seemingly increasingly sparse but lacking in detail.
Was there any real progress in these meetings? No, they served more to try to open up humanitarian corridors, with very limited success, and for both sides to make their point. Russia reinforced its demands (neutrality towards NATO, demilitarization, cession of Crimea and Donbass), Ukraine said it would accept neutrality if there are external security guarantees. Moscow accuses Kiev of not giving in on anything.
What to see and hear to stay informed
