SEPTEMBER 2, 2022

Russia and Ukraine may have agreed on a tentative deal to end the war in April, according to a recent piece in Foreign Affairs.

“Russian and Ukrainian negotiators appeared to have tentatively agreed on the outlines of a negotiated interim settlement,” wrote Fiona Hill and Angela Stent. “Russia would withdraw to its position on February 23, when it controlled part of the Donbas region and all of Crimea, and in exchange, Ukraine would promise not to seek NATO membership and instead receive security guarantees from a number of countries.”

The news highlights the impact of former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson’s efforts to stop negotiations, as journalist Branko Marcetic noted on Twitter. The decision to scuttle the deal coincided with Johnson’s April visit to Kyiv, during which he reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to break off talks with Russia for two key reasons: Putin cannot be negotiated with, and the West isn’t ready for the war to end.

The apparent revelation raises some key questions: Why did Western leaders want to stop Kyiv from signing a seemingly good deal with Moscow? Do they consider the conflict a proxy war with Russia? And, most importantly, what would it take to get back to a deal?

For now, we can only speculate about the answers to the first two questions. The third is perhaps no less challenging, especially given the fact that both Ukraine and Russia have (at least publicly) hardened their negotiating positions significantly in recent months. But there are some clues that could help us answer it.

One possible path back to a peace deal is to build on July’s grain agreement, in which Kyiv and Moscow agreed to restart wheat exports from Ukraine’s Black Sea ports. The deal has held strong despite continued hostilities, allowing more than one million metric tons of grain to enter the world market so far. This accord shows that each side is at least interested in reducing the global impact of the war.

The other option is more complex but no less important. Just yesterday, a team of international inspectors arrived at the Russian-held Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which has been threatened by nearby shelling in recent weeks. The visit, which will allow experts to ensure that the plant remains in safe condition, is the result of intensive talks, backed by pressure from the international community. In this case, both Russia and Ukraine are signaling their commitment to avoiding a nuclear catastrophe.

In other words, Kyiv and Moscow have both shown that they want to mitigate the secondary effects of the conflict, and they’re willing to negotiate with the enemy in order to do it. But, as long as this war drags on, people around the world will continue to suffer, and the specter of a catastrophic event — whether through an errant strike on a power plant or an uncontrolled escalation to nuclear war — will continue to loom. It’s time for Russia, Ukraine, and the West to recognize that there’s only one way to put an end to those risks: Lay down arms and come to the negotiating table.

READ MORE:

https://responsiblestatecraft.org/2022/09/02/diplomacy-watch-why-did-the-west-stop-a-peace-deal-in-ukraine/

READ FROM TOP.

SEE ALSO: https://www.rt.com/russia/578220-putin-ukraine-neutrality-plan/

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW...............

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ns1fTjxyeeo

READ FROM TOP.

SEE ALSO: https://www.rt.com/russia/578220-putin-ukraine-neutrality-plan/

FREE JULIAN ASSANGE NOW..............

RUSI has been cited in 336 UK press articles in the past two years, and is invariably described by journalists simply as a “think tank”.

But the organisation’s funders include the UK and US governments, alongside arms corporations, and its commentaries overwhelmingly reflect the perspectives of the British establishment.

Declassified could find no instances in the hundreds of press articles where RUSI’s funders were mentioned. 

In the past two years, the Guardian or Observer mentioned RUSI in 106 articles, the Telegraph and Sunday Telegraph in 66 and the Times and Sunday Times in 28 articles. 

The references in the papers were quotes from RUSI staff, notably on the war in Ukraine and UK military policy, or reports released by the organisation.

RUSI says it is “an independent think tank engaged in cutting-edge defence and security research” and that it “embodies nearly two centuries of forward thinking, free discussion, and careful reflection on defence and security matters”.

Based in Whitehall, close to the Ministry of Defence, RUSI was founded in 1831 by the Duke of Wellington, the Field Marshal and later prime minister.

Its second largest funder – providing between £500,000 and £999,000 – is the US State Department while its other large sponsors include the UK Foreign Office, the British army and arms corporation BAE Systems, which all gave up to £0.5m each in 2020-21.

BAE, Britain’s largest arms exporter, has given between £600,000 and £1.5m to RUSI in the past three years.

Smaller funders include arms manufacturers Lockheed Martin, Airbus, Babcock, Leonardo, Northrop Grumman, and Raytheon, alongside the UK Ministry of Defence and the Royal Navy. 

RUSI’s largest funder is the European Commission, which represents European governments.

READ MORE:

https://declassifieduk.org/how-uk-media-mislead-us-about-britains-leading-military-think-tank/

READ FROM TOP.

SEE ALSO:

regarding Julian.....