- Voices are growing in Washington calling for dialogue at the gates of winter, but diplomacy is nowhere near.
 |
| Joe Biden with the President of Poland, Andrej Duda. |
And if support for Ukraine is split in two? The US already suggests that Zelensky must negotiate and the Baltics insist on military support
The war in Ukraine is on its way to nine months and is already, for many, a frozen conflict. Peace seems a long way off and a ceasefire only seems feasible if the winter is so harsh that neither Moscow nor Kyiv want to continue hostilities. Little by little, in fact, the tone has been lowered. The Kremlin says in an unbelievable way that it does not put conditions on talking to Zelensky, and the Ukrainian president utters the word peace with a small mouth because the wave of bombardments once again closes any door to diplomacy.
Meanwhile, the West could end up dividing: the United States has already dropped that Kyiv must negotiate, and the EU could get on that thesis... but it depends on the Member States and there the Baltics maintain a tougher position. So far, the Union has already approved 3.1 billion euros in armaments for Ukraine, in addition, to strictly economic support. Washington also maintains its support and repeats the message that the negotiation will take place "when Ukraine wants" and "on the terms it wants". But as time passes, the cold lurks, and social weariness grows. Could the Western bloc be divided in two between those who move their chairs so that Zelensky can sit down to talk to Russia and those who believe that the military push should not cease?
Júlia Codina, an analyst in international cooperation and humanitarian aid, explains to 20minutos that "sending economic aid but not weapons is basically what European countries have done in other wars." Stop sending arms to Ukraine now "I don't know if it's something plausible," adds Codina, "but there is some pressure" for that supply to stop. "Biden cannot publicly say that Zelenski has to open up to negotiations," he says, landing the question with his own name.
"We do see that Zelenski already makes a list of conditions, some of which are excessive for Russia to be able to sit at the table. But there has been no mention of the veto of speaking with Putin, for example," says the analyst, but clarifies: "I don't think stopping arms shipments is the EU's chosen course of action; the problem is a monster of countries. National interests matter and that's why the Baltics have the position they do."
Codina, yes, asks to have more scenarios. "There is a kind of donor fatigue and financial support may not be sustainable in the long term," he argues, before counting on the fact that Russia "uses the winter variable, but also the refugee variable." Therefore, it is not necessary to take into account only the energy factor. "Refugees continue to go to neighboring countries and that puts pressure, like it or not, on Europe," says Codina, who, nevertheless, believes that "it would look very bad in the eyes of the people if the West stopped sending weapons to Ukraine.".
Despite the fact that the conflict is going to be nine months old, the diplomatic route is not on the horizon. "The words we see or the messages do not allow us to glimpse a negotiating table," argues an analyst who, on the other hand, does believe that "some leaders of European countries and even voices in the US are more aware of popular discontent on issues such as inflation or electricity prices".
The energy is a factor of a lot of pressure and in the end, it is a game of seeing who can last the most against Russia
"Perhaps the EU thought that a ceasefire would be reached earlier, but that has not been the case. I am almost sure that if this lasts beyond winter, some country will get off the boat to help Ukraine. Energy is a factor under a lot of pressure and in the end, it's a game of seeing who can last the longest against Russia", he concludes, while incorporating into the debate the fact that the position of the Baltics in favor of continuing to firmly support Kyiv takes into account the "memory history" since they are countries "with a past under the USSR, and they do not forget it" even despite being the ones that receive the most pressure at the migratory level or with war risks, as was seen with the fall of a missile in Polish territory that caused two deaths.
On the other hand, Daniel Gil, an analyst at The Political Room, adds that the question that must be asked is "if Ukraine can win the war, understood by winning to expel Russian troops from all of its territories." And when faced with this question, the response of each actor involved is not the same. "Then that is the reason for the resignation," assumes Gil. The Baltics and Poland believe that with sufficient Western support, Ukraine can completely expel Russia from its territory, a thesis that, for example, the United States, France, Spain, Italy, or Germany are beginning to dislike.
"That is why Western Europe already believes that Kyiv should look for a favorable situation for peace negotiations because right now we are also headed towards a stalemate in the war. Neither Russia can meet its objectives nor Ukraine has enough strength to win " the analyst continues. This impasse is something that both the EU and the United States "want to avoid because they consider that it is not in anyone's interest for the war to drag on for several years."
Instead, the Baltics believe that it is "precisely this inaction by the West, this reluctance to send weapons that could be decisive, is what makes the situation stagnant." In the words of Gil, "that is the main disagreement: each one tries to promote the debate and the framework in their favor." Everything moves, but it does so in various directions that, perhaps, instead of meeting, they end up diverging and causing some friction between the allied parties. And that is a problem for Ukraine.
