To end the Ukraine war, we need diplomacy not blackmail

ENDING THE RUSSIA-UKRAINE WAR: DIPLOMACY NOW

Against the backdrop of what can only be called blackmail from the president of the most powerful nation on earth, we offer this thoughtful, nuanced discussion on the type of diplomacy we need to end Russian aggression and secure a lasting peace.

Ukraine and Russia: The Increased Nuclear Threat in These Uncertain Times is a webinar hosted on 13 February 2025 by a Canadian NGO, the Group of 78, and two American civil society organizations, the International Academy for Multicultural Cooperation and the G20 Interfaith Forum.

The only positive glimmer in the Ukraine war nightmare has been the stark realization by the U.S. and NATO that a direct military engagement with Russia carries an unacceptable risk of nuclear war. But the only way to remove all risk of escalation is to end the war. – Peggy Mason

Moderated by RI President Peggy Mason, the webinar featured thoughtful and insightful presentations by two Canadian experts: former diplomat turned international studies professor Paul Meyer and Dr. Walter Dorn, defence studies professor at both the Royal Military College of Canada and the Canadian Forces College.

The webinar explores how the nuclear threat posed by the Ukraine-Russia conflict can be minimized, or ideally eliminated altogether, through determined and enlightened diplomacy.

Reminding everyone that diplomacy had regrettably not been a major focus of international engagement on the Ukraine-Russia conflict since Russia’s full-scale invasion in February of 2022, despite efforts from many sides including from the organizations hosting the webinar, Mason went on to say:

That all changed yesterday when U.S. President Trump announced he had spoken to President Putin for more than an hour and further that the two countries would begin negotiations to end the Ukraine war. No mention of the role of Ukraine or Europe.

The first speaker, Paul Meyer, had this astute and chilling observation about the nuclear threat:

President Putin’s cynical and irresponsible nuclear sabre-rattling — raising the spectre of deploying nuclear weapons in order to destabilize and deter his adversaries … points to the use of nuclear weapons as tools of coercion and intimidation.

On the same issue, Walter Dorn observed that “discussions about negotiations” to end the Ukraine war having been initiated,

there is probably less likelihood that there will be a deliberate action by Putin to use nuclear weapons.

On the substance of the negotiations, Walter Dorn, while first asserting that aggression should not be rewarded by Russia acquiring legal control of any Ukrainian territory, also acknowledged that, as a matter of “reality”,

Ukraine may need to recognize that Russia has … [de facto] control over Ukrainian territory in Donbass and Crimea.

On possible next steps, Paul Meyer asserted:

Canada and Europe and indeed partners from elsewhere … Japan and Korea … should look to mobilizing pretty deep resources, both diplomatic and defence capabilities, in order to prevent any further devastating tear in … [the] fabric of international security and the rules-based order under the UN Charter. We need to look to creative but determined approaches to preserve that peace.

What role for Canada?

In her concluding remarks moderator Peggy Mason took up an audience question on a potential role for Canada:

I would hope that Canada would fully engage with our European partners on the diplomatic dimension. The opportunity is there … [despite] many pitfalls, as Paul and Walter have outlined, to engage, and there are levers: sanctions relief is a very important element of that [engagement]. So is a legitimate role for Russia in the European security architecture going forward — not an illegitimate role. … Those are very important areas for negotiation, and I certainly hope Canada takes that up.

To see the webinar in its entirety, click on the arrow below.

 

Russia in Review, Feb. 14-21, 2025: Russia-U.S. Negotiations

Key takeaways from the Belfer Centre’s weekly “Russia in Review” include:

• Agreement by senior American and Russian officials on 18 February to establish high-level teams to work toward ending the war in Ukraine and finding a path toward normalizing relations
  • According to the U.S., this could include new partnerships both in geopolitics and business
  • Putin praised the talks and pointed to “the renewal of START-3 on the table”
  • Both sides referenced a possible Trump-Putin meeting later this month

The U.S. also signaled that sanctions relief for Russia could be on the table in talks over ending the war in Ukraine.

Trump and Zelensky to meet at White House on 28 Feb 2025

According to an NBC news report of Trump’s latest Cabinet briefing, the U.S. and Ukraine:

had made progress on an agreement that would grant the U.S. a significant ownership stake in Ukraine’s rare-earth minerals as a form of repayment for Washington’s support of Kyiv since Russia invaded in February 2022.

The deal will be further discussed at a White House meeting of Presidents Zelensky and Trump on 28 February 2025. According to Ukrainian news reports on the draft agreement, it does not contain concrete security guarantees but states that the U.S. government:

supports Ukraine’s efforts to obtain security guarantees needed to establish lasting peace.

Negotiating leverage that the U.S. could use to achieve a sustainable peace deal

The key to American success in ending the war in Ukraine is to broaden, rather than narrow, the issues under negotiation. – Quincy Brief

For more expert discussion of negotiation strategies that offer the best opportunity for achieving sustainable peace in Ukraine, see Quincy Brief #71: Peace Through Strength in Ukraine: Sources of U.S. Leverage in Negotiations (George Beebe, Mark Episkopos and Anatol Lieven, 19 February 2025).

In the authors’ view:

America can maximize its leverage in settlement talks by refocusing on the broader geopolitical context for the war: Russia’s objection to a NATO–centric European security order in which Russia has no place and its neighbors sooner or later become military partners of the United States.

In short, they argue that a narrow negotiation, focusing only on ending the conflict, plays to Russia’s clear military advantage in a war of attrition where it has a much greater population and a much larger military industry.

On a broader negotiation, they argue:

By contrast, if Washington recognizes that Moscow’s security concerns extend beyond Ukraine to the broader military threat posed by U.S. and NATO forces in Europe — a threat Russia cannot blunt by conquering Ukraine — the U.S. can employ leverage that Kyiv lacks in direct bargaining with Moscow.

Key elements of American leverage include:

• Expansion or constraining of the U.S. force posture in Europe depending on Russia’s willingness to compromise over Ukraine
• Steps towards Russian re-inclusion in Western diplomatic forums, in accordance with genuine progress toward ending the war
• Sanctions relief conditional on compliance with peace settlement provisions
• U.S. engagement with the Chinese special envoy on Ukraine and a significant Chinese role in the post-accord reconstruction of Ukraine
• Ukraine’s permanent neutrality in exchange for Russian support for Ukraine’s E.U. membership

Strengthening Europe

European stability is a precondition for an expanded European geopolitical role.

The Quincy Brief ends with the importance of a sustainable peace deal for Europe, warning that

A Europe riven by crises and divided by a modern variation of the Iron Curtain will be a weak and preoccupied Europe, unable to play a constructive and stabilizing role in the evolving multipolar order.

To avoid such a future, Europe needs to end its “overreliance on American patronage”, significantly increase both its military and diplomatic capacity and “adopt a more realistic European approach to diplomacy with Russia”.

RI President Peggy Mason comments:

Surely it is obvious that Europe — and Canada — simply must get their act together in preparation for meaningful engagement with Russia on its role in Europe. It is in no one’s interest, least of all Ukraine’s, to leave this up to Russia and the U.S.

Whither Canada?

Pledges of Canadian peacekeepers to help verify a peace agreement are most welcome. But Canada should also be fully engaged in developing the terms for Russia’s re-engagement in Europe.

We call on the Government of Canada, as a matter of urgency and in concert with European partners, to supplement continuing military support for Ukraine with significant diplomatic resources and capabilities toward the realization of an enduring negotiated settlement to the Russia-Ukraine conflict.

Photo credit: Senate of Canada (Canadian and Ukrainian flags)