Following the leak of the American plan for resolving the conflict in Ukraine and its confirmation, the next round of US-Ukrainian peace talks began in Geneva on November 23. US Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Ukrainian President's chief of staff Andriy Yermak, and technical and military-political advisers to both sides participated in the talks.
Europe on the margins
Although the Ukrainian delegation first launched the Geneva talks with representatives of European countries, European leaders and EU representatives are not directly involved in the negotiations on the plan itself. Delegates from France, Germany, and the UK held parallel consultations in Switzerland to clarify their positions on the American initiative, circulating ideas for presenting alternative proposals to the plan, which are desperate attempts to avoid being left out of the negotiating margins.
During the negotiations, the United States and Ukraine adopted a joint statement, noting that the discussions were "constructive, focused, and productive." The parties noted "substantial progress" and announced the development of an "updated and improved framework document." The statement was signed only by Washington and Kiev, without the participation of any European country, which records two facts: first, it documents Ukraine's agreement to the concept of American demands, and second, it documents the exclusion of Europe (the biggest obstacle in the opinion of Washington and Moscow) from the negotiation process.
Effective negotiations or effective squeezing?
Secretary of State Rubio, before leaving Geneva, emphasized that the negotiations were the most productive and expressed great optimism, noting that the parties "can reach a final draft in a very short time." If we decipher this idea, Rubio notes with satisfaction that Ukraine is giving in. Most likely, the US initially took a maximalist stance to secure the expected optimal concessions from Kyiv in subsequent negotiations, presenting them as a "favor" to Kyiv.
Thus, it can be noted that the American "blackmail" of leaving Ukraine alone in the war has begun to bear fruit. And that the problem is posed in this way is evidenced not only by President Volodymyr Zelensky's message to the Ukrainians last weekend, which clearly indicates that they are faced with the dilemma of losing either their dignity or their main ally, but also by the deadline set by Trump for tearing an agreement from Kyiv by November 27. They deprive Kyiv of the opportunity to maneuver, to stall for time, to rely on European resistance.
Kyiv, of course, will try to use this short window to wrest some minor advantages from Washington. This is evidenced by the fact that, despite the optimism expressed by the US Secretary of State, the most sensitive points of the document, related to the future status of the territories under Russian occupation, tangible and long-term security guarantees for Ukraine, have not yet been actually agreed upon. To what extent will there be… Russian agreement… to disagree
The Russian President, during a Security Council meeting convened on Saturday, approved the American plan as the basis for starting negotiations. Although this circumstance may sound optimistic on the surface, it is more likely that this round may also fail. And the reason is not the disagreements between the US and Ukraine or the rejection of Europe, but Russia's behavior and simple political logic.
First, the Kremlin-friendly "expert" and media circles are already actively developing the narrative that the American plan should be rejected, because Russia does not need peace, but victory. This is done for two purposes: first, to create the impression that Russia can sustain the war for a very long time and maintain the current military initiative, and second, to reject the American plan at any time, based on the so-called "people are against" logic.
In addition, it is evident that until Kiev confirms the existence of the plan, Russia, represented by President Putin, which has been silent about its existence, suddenly convenes a meeting of the Security Council and, without waiting for the results of the American-Ukrainian negotiations, announces its consent to this plan as a negotiating platform. In other words, Putin approves a project that is still under discussion and obviously involves changes. Most likely, this is done precisely so that in the future, in the event of any editing that deviates even slightly from its strategic goals, it can declare that the new version of the plan does not reflect its interests, that is, to abort the negotiation process. In this way, Moscow will gain time to adopt a more tactically strong negotiating position. And Moscow now has reasons for this.
American services to the Kremlin
First, Zelensky's reputation has been significantly shaken among foreign partners due to the major corruption scandal that erupted in his cabinet. In addition, the initiative on the front is almost entirely in the hands of the Russians. The imminent possible fall of the city of Kupyansk, which is of enormous strategic importance to Ukrainian defense, will shift the balance of power, significantly weakening Ukraine's negotiating position and increasing the likelihood that Russia will agree to harsher terms to avoid a catastrophe.
The United States has provided invaluable support to the Russians in this matter. The latter has not only reduced the military assistance provided to Kyiv, which Europe cannot directly replenish, but has also sought to force Ukraine to capitulate. This is no coincidence: the United States is the only force capable of crushing European resistance in this matter.
In such conditions, when on the one hand, things are not going well for Kyiv on the front. The US considers the only option to stop the war to be forcing defeat on the victim of aggression. With each successively more difficult condition, a natural question arises: why should Russia stop now?
At this stage, Russia has already reached the point that, as a result of the American plan, any modification of it will avoid responsibility for war crimes and achieve the lifting of international sanctions against it and its reintegration into the global economic system.
Moreover, it is highly noteworthy that the US does not even want to wait for the results of the hefty new economic sanctions it imposed on Russia about a month ago, which, without exaggeration, could bring the Russian economy to its knees. These sanctions have only just come into force. And it turns out that the US is now doing everything to save Russia from the consequences of its own sanctions and end the war at the most convenient moment for Moscow. Therefore, if it is possible to wait and achieve, for example, the complete acquisition of not only Donbass, but also Lugansk and Zaporozhye, why not do it?
The only way to avoid such a prospect depends on what military-economic resources Russia actually has to continue the war. It is not excluded, of course, that the real reason for agreeing to the American plan, while creating the impression of agreeing with difficulty, is precisely the calculation of not having the resources to continue the war. In such a case, getting out of the war with such an outcome is more than a victory.
Gor Abrahamyan
