Trump reportedly stated that Russian President Putin has asked to meet with him as soon as possible, while talks of an end to the conflict are becoming more frequent, although the basis for this is unclear. Vitalij Portnikov, one of the most prominent Ukrainian commentators, analyzed the situation for Radio Svoboda, emphasizing the importance of the West not allowing Moscow to politically “swallow” Kiev.
By: Vladimir Rozanskij – Asia News
Published on:
As the new year approaches and the inauguration of Donald Trump’s presidency in the United States draws near, discussions about the end of the Russian war in Ukraine are increasingly common, although there are still no concrete prospects for peace negotiations. Just yesterday, Trump revealed that Russian President Vladimir Putin had asked to meet with him as soon as possible, although it’s uncertain if the meeting will take place. Vitalij Portnikov, a leading Ukrainian commentator and editorialist for Radio Svoboda, attempted to summarize the factors that could support the long-awaited breakthrough.
One of the most discussed topics relates to the new US president’s ability to influence his Ukrainian counterpart, Volodymyr Zelensky, although there is little mention of the pressure points that could enable Trump to persuade Putin to halt. It is clear to all that if the Ukrainians stopped defending themselves, it would mean the end of Ukraine as an independent state, while Russia’s withdrawal would allow the coexistence of the two opposing states, something Putin is not willing to concede.
Portnikov questions “what could be the necessary conditions to convince the Russian president to at least freeze the conflict, if not sign a comprehensive peace agreement,” pointing out two main possibilities. The first concerns the uncertain conditions of the Russian economy and the risk of internal social unrest, which might suggest a temporary halt to military operations to restore necessary resources and gather new strength to resume the war at a later stage.
The second possibility, also linked to pessimistic economic forecasts and the uncertain chances of a battlefield victory, would be Putin’s choice to politically subjugate Ukraine as a satellite state of Russia, avoiding wasting resources in vain. It is not easy to assess Russia’s economic conditions, and experts are divided into various hypotheses, largely related to the continuation or postponement of military spending and actions, for predictable periods or indefinitely.
As the political scientist observes, “for us, the crucial thing is not so much the state of the economy, but what Putin thinks about the state of the economy.” It is undeniable that Moscow intends to continue using its usual methods, including new technologies, and the return of former Deputy Prime Minister Yuriy Boyko, leader of the pro-Russian opposition party in Ukraine, Opzž (banned by law), to the scene is not coincidental. Boyko has been spreading new versions of the narrative about the “violation of the rights of the Russian-speaking population of Ukraine” by unspecified “radical forces” on TikTok. His intervention came the day after the unexpected victory in the first round of the presidential elections in Romania by pro-Russian candidate Kelin Georgescu, highlighting the typical hybrid and informational warfare strategies of the Kremlin.
The level of social network penetration differs in Ukraine compared to Romania, with more anonymous tools like Telegram preferred, but Russian propaganda still manages to influence, not only to sway broader sectors of society to its side but also by emphasizing the sense of submission of Ukrainians after three years of war, advising them to seek peace and “coexistence” with Russia, with certain security guarantees. Portnikov comments that “ultimately, this is also the line that allowed pro-Russians in Georgia to prevail over the majority of the population,” emphasizing the strategies of hybrid and informational warfare.
