OPINION: A Game of Chicken: Kyiv or Kiev?

Ukraine’s decision to accept the Trump administration push for an early ceasefire in the Russo-Ukraine war did surprise me. 

I thought that Kyiv saw leverage in agreeing to a ceasefire and would have wanted some concession therein, particularly around security guarantees. As is, their position was undermined by the scrap in the Oval Office, and the withdrawal then of US military and intelligence support. They were then forced to backtrack and accept the resumption of that support as the quid pro quo for agreeing to the ceasefire.

I think also herein that allies, particularly the UK, are trying to coach the Ukrainian team as to how to play the “volatile” Trump administration. 

The UK likely advised don’t antagonize Trump at all cost, conserve your ammo (quite literally) for the battles in negotiations to come. They also likely advised that this might not be a game of cards, but more like a game of chicken – but with the prize being whether it is Kyiv or Kiev. 

There will be lots of opportunities to negotiate hard when more substantial talks on a long-term peace in Ukraine get under way further down the line. As is, the clever thing to do was to call Putin’s bluff (ok, going back to playing cards here) and agree to a ceasefire which puts the ball (man, mixing metaphors to a different sport now) back in Putin’s court. 

Ukraine retook the initiative by appearing as the willing partner to a ceasefire deal, and now how is Putin going to play this? If he fails to agree to a ceasefire, he then is revealed as the malign actor (now into a theatrical metaphor) and would risk the wrath of Trump – that is if Trump actually has the balls to play hard ball with Putin.

Will Putin agree to a ceasefire?

Well, the US negotiating team is apparently on its way to Moscow today for talks with the Kremlin.

Putin’s modus operandi, from years of negotiations on Ukraine, and with the West, is to use any talks/negotiations as a leverage point, to secure concessions. He sees talks as a way to probe the opposition, looks for weaknesses and asks for concessions. 

His instinct here will be to play hard to get concessions – drag talks out as long as possible to show strength or that he does not really need a ceasefire, and that it’s the other side that really wants this outcome.

I think developments this week in Kursk are probably part of this negotiating ploy by Putin.

First, from Putin’s perspective, it shows strength, that Russia is on the front foot, and trying to imply that the military option still suits Russia. 

The reality though is that even though the media have been focused on Russian military gains in recent months, actually the gains in terms of territory have been pretty limited – and Russia overall controls less than 20% of Ukrainian territory. Even its offensive in Donbas has run into the ground around Toretsk, with Ukrainian forces actually making some gains there again.

Second, obviously taking Kursk back takes a negotiating chip away from Ukraine. There had been a suggestion that Ukraine would seek to negotiate land in Kursk for land in Kherson and Zaporizhiya, but now with Russian troops pushing back into Sumy Oblast, Putin might be thinking that the negotiation will be any land remaining under Ukrainian control in Kursk for land occupied now by Russia in Sumy.

Note here that Putin always escalates before negotiations and this is what we might be seeing in Kursk.

So I think Putin will try and ask for concessions as part of any agreement over a ceasefire – more firm statements from Trump as to no NATO for Ukraine, no security guarantees, Russia keeps all the land it occupies, plus de-Nazification and demilitarisation of Ukraine. 

The former is elections which change the government in Kyiv and the latter is limitations on Ukrainian military capability (neutral status), or perhaps that the US turns off again military and intelligence support for Ukraine. The latter will likely be the key demand by Putin as part of these ceasefire talks.

The danger for Putin is that if he tries to bargain too hard, drag things out too long, then he risks the wrath of Trump. 

The assumption there is that the US would boost military support then for Ukraine and increase sanctions on Russia. 

Actually though, given the Trump administration has thus far had a carrot and stick approach to these negotiations – carrots for Russia, sticks for Ukraine – there must be doubt as to whether Trump really has the balls to take on Putin. 

Is Trump really willing to max the pressure on Putin? If I have my doubts, then so does Putin, and likely he will look to test the US position in these talks over a ceasefire. Finding out now what the Trump administration’s resolve to play hard ball is will be surely useful later down the line for Putin when substantive talks begin.

But note here that even if a ceasefire agreement is reached here, still very difficult talks lie ahead. Massive issues remain to be discussed.

Key for me will be what security assurances Ukraine is given, as I cannot see Ukraine agreeing to any long term deal, with de facto acceptance of the loss of territory, until it gets some kind of assurance that land remaining under Ukrainian control is secure and can then develop (economically, politically and socially on the path to EU accession).

Putin will want to ensure that Ukraine is absolutely not secure to: a) give him options to invade in the future, and; b) to ensure Ukraine is not able to successfully develop as above, so as to leave the country economically, politically and socially weak, so as to facilitate future Russian intervention in Ukraine.

Putin wants a weak, failed Ukrainian state. Obviously Ukraine wants the opposite.

And this war, and negotiation now is not about NATO enlargement or Ukraine’s NATO membership. It never was. Simply put, it is about Ukraine’s sovereignty, independent of Russia, or not.

Ukraine will not accept any deal that undermines/fails to secure its fundamental sovereignty. For Ukraine, it is about the survival of the state, and its people. For Putin, it is about the opposite. So while Trump might see this simply as a case of war or peace, for the two main protagonists in this war and negotiations, it is about something different, and war has been the result of the underlying problem/dispute about Ukrainian sovereignty.

Not sure Trump et al get all this.

Reprinted from the author’s tashecon blog. See the original here.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s and not necessarily those of Kyiv Post.