At Project Syndicate Richard Haass considers the bleak prospects for negotiating an end to the war in Ukraine:
One possibility for the West would be to link the entire relationship with Russia to Russia’s actions in Ukraine. This would be a mistake, though, because Russia can affect other Western interests, such as limiting the nuclear and missile capabilities of Iran and North Korea, and the success of global efforts to limit the emissions that cause climate change.
The good news is that, as the prisoner exchange demonstrates, profound differences over Ukraine need not preclude conducting mutually useful business if both sides are willing to compartmentalize. But protecting the possibility of selective cooperation will require sophisticated, disciplined diplomacy.
For starters, the US and its partners will need to prioritize and even limit their goals in Ukraine. This means renouncing talk of regime change in Moscow. We need to deal with the Russia we have, not the one we would prefer. Putin’s position may come to be challenged from within (or he may succumb to reported health challenges) but the West is not in a position to engineer his removal, much less ensure that someone better replaces him.
Likewise, Western governments would be wise to put off talk of war crimes tribunals for senior Russian officials and stop boasting about helping Ukraine target senior Russian generals and ships. The war and investigations are ongoing, and the Russians need to see some benefit in acting responsibly. The same holds for reparations.1
Similarly, although Russia will likely find itself worse off economically and militarily as a result of initiating this war of choice, the US government should make clear that, contrary to Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin’s remarks, America’s goal is not to use the war to weaken Russia. On the contrary, the US should underscore that it wants the war to end as soon as possible on terms that reflect Ukraine’s sovereign, independent status.
I honestly don’t think the Biden Administration is willing to go along with that program or, at least, I see no indications it is. One might retort that who cares as long as the terms are agreeable to the Ukrainian government? IMO the Ukrainian government will be pressed to reject anything that isn’t acceptable to Washington and to all appearances both sides are sticking to maximalist objectives.
The problem is two-fold:
First, the US refuses to negotiate anything with Russia. That refusal is largely what led to the current war.
Second, the US objective is regime change in Russia. It wants a return to the corrupt Yeltsin regime that permitted looting of Russian industry and raw materials.
So, the war must continue until either Ukraine is destroyed or Russia is exhausted. Maybe both.
This Sunday, Finland is supposed to decide on applying for membership in NATO. Ukraine in NATO was unacceptable to Russia, because it would put a large NATO army on its border. Finland is adjacent to critical Russian strategic forces in Murmansk and the Kola Peninsular. If Russia will go to war over Ukraine, what will it do in response to a much larger and imminent threat from Finland?
Croatia has indicated it might veto Finland’s admission to NATO. Pray to God that someone does.
Sweden doesn’t matter.
Our leaders seem oblivious to the dangers in the current situation. It’s like the summer of 1914. One damned action leads to another and another, all the time escalating.