AMERIKAN RIGHT WING VIEW
'Victory plan' vows to reclaim land, join NATO, but some decry unrealistic 'wish list'
In this photo provided by the Press Service Of The President Of Ukraine on Oct. 16, 2024, Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelenskyy speaks to parliamentarians at Verkhovna Rada in Kyiv, Ukraine. (Press Service Of The President Of Ukraine via AP)
By Ben Wolfgang - The Washington Times - Wednesday, October 16, 2024
The Russia-Ukraine war could end next year on terms favorable to Kyiv if the U.S. and NATO back an ambitious — and, by most accounts, unrealistic — five-point victory plan, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Wednesday as he outlined a proposal that seemed to fall flat across much of the West.
Mr. Zelenskyy told the Ukrainian parliament that his plan would end the war and guarantee his country’s security for decades.
It was the long-awaited public announcement of a plan the Ukrainian president has been discussing privately on trips to Washington, the United Nations and a string of European capitals in recent weeks. The plan aims to stem mounting public war fatigue in Ukraine and among its leading Western supporters.
Much of the plan reads like a Kyiv wish list while its troops battle to hold back advancing Russian forces that occupy nearly one-fifth of Ukraine in the south and east.
The plan calls for NATO to immediately extend a formal “unconditional invitation” to Kyiv, provide additional arms and satellite data, and help Ukraine “deploy a comprehensive non-nuclear strategic deterrence package” that would force Russia into “an honest diplomatic process” to end the fighting or face the destruction of its army.
Most of the key points mirror wish list items that Mr. Zelenskyy has publicly outlined several other times. Washington and other major alliance powers have long resisted some headline-worthy points, such as the call for Ukraine to immediately be invited into NATO. Part of Russian President Vladimir Putin’s justification for invading in February 2022 was to keep Ukraine out of NATO.
A NATO invitation seems wildly optimistic and centers on theoretical U.S. policy moves to allow Ukraine to strike deep inside Russia with American weapons.
Still, it is noteworthy that Mr. Zelenskyy attached such a clear, definitive time frame to the proposal. He insisted the war could end next year if his plan is adopted.
The Ukrainian leader said a clear signal of NATO membership would show Moscow that its war plans are “headed for defeat.”
Fatigue
Mr. Zelenskyy’s relatively specific end date seems to be a subtle acknowledgment of the fatigue setting in across the West, especially in the U.S., and that a victory by Republican Donald Trump in next month’s presidential election could put significantly more pressure on Kyiv to begin cease-fire talks with Moscow.
Amid the strong support for Ukraine in the U.S. and across Europe is a growing sense that the focus must turn to some kind of peace settlement short of total victory for either side. Mr. Zelenskyy’s comments appear designed, at least in part, to motivate war-weary allies to redouble their support for Ukraine with the understanding that peace is on the horizon.
“The urgency of the victory plan is now. These are points, most of which are thoroughly time-based,” Mr. Zelenskyy told Ukrainian lawmakers. “If we begin following this idea, this concrete victory plan right now, it may be possible to end the war no later than next year.”
The Ukrainian president also framed the conflict in global terms. “The fate of the coming decades is being decided by the actions of our global coalition in defense of Ukraine and international law,” he said.
“For us, it is entirely legitimate to turn to our partners for support in this battle. For our partners, it is completely practical to help us not only endure but also prevail in war for our lives. In doing so, they will help themselves just as much,” he said.
He suggested commercial profit for those who stood by his government. Ukraine has significant deposits of critical minerals such as uranium, titanium and lithium, and its farmlands are among the most extensive grain-producing fields in the world. A Putin victory, he said, would put those resources in the wrong hands.
Ukraine’s raw materials and physical assets are “strategically valuable resources, and they will strengthen either Russia and its allies or Ukraine and the democratic world.”
Mr. Zelenskyy’s victory plan will likely disappoint observers expecting a clear push toward ending the war that perhaps lays out broad terms for peace talks with the Kremlin.
President Biden spoke with the Ukrainian leader on Wednesday, but a White House readout of the call said little about the administration’s position on the proposal.
“President Zelenskyy updated President Biden on his plan to achieve victory over Russia, and the two leaders tasked their teams to engage in further consultations on next steps,” the White House statement said.
At the State Department, spokesperson Matthew Miller also said little.
“We continue to engage with the government of Ukraine about that plan,” he said.
Some key political figures inside Ukraine said the proposal failed to offer anything that would dramatically change dynamics.
“First of all, it’s not a plan. Plan means something with concrete steps,” said opposition lawmaker Oleksii Honcharenko. “It’s kind of a wish list from Ukraine for our partners, how they can and should support us. And it doesn’t look realistic. We were waiting for some real serious conversation about the situation and the strategy, and this is not that.”
Even NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte sounded skeptical.
“We are working with the Ukrainians to understand better … how this would help in ending the war,” he said.
NATO has given vague promises of a road map to eventual Ukraine membership, but the alliance has been reluctant to take concrete steps to bring Kyiv into the fold while it remains at war with Russia. Such a move could draw the entire bloc into the conflict. At the very least, the Kremlin would see it as a highly provocative act that may necessitate further Russian military aggression in Europe.
America’s role
It’s almost surely no coincidence that the Biden administration announced another $425 million in U.S. military aid to Ukraine just hours after Mr. Zelenskyy’s speech. The assets include surface-to-air missiles, anti-tank weapons and anti-aircraft missiles.
Since the February 2022 invasion, the U.S. has given Ukraine more than $61 billion in direct military aid and other financial and economic assistance. The administration pledged more aid in the next several months.
Western weapons have helped Ukraine capture and hold a significant swath of Russian territory in the Kursk region. The Kursk operation has given Ukraine new momentum in the war, though analysts warn that Russian forces are making gains in other areas and that Ukraine’s long-term trajectory in the conflict is still an uphill battle at best.
Indeed, Mr. Zelenskyy’s victory plan hinges on major influxes of additional military aid from the U.S. and other NATO nations. The proposal even calls for “assistance from our partners in manning our reserve brigades for the armed forces of Ukraine,” a step that seemingly would deepen the direct involvement of other Western powers in Ukraine’s future security.
The plan also calls for Western financial investment in Ukraine in the immediate postwar period that Mr. Zelenskyy said would pay off.
“This is an opportunity for the United States and our partners in the [Group of Seven] to work with Ukraine — the ally that can provide a return on investment,” he said.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov mocked the plan as “ephemeral,” and Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova called it “a set of incoherent slogans.”
Elsewhere in Europe, key leaders reiterated that they are prepared to directly engage with the Kremlin and with Mr. Putin personally to help end the war.
German Chancellor Olaf Scholz told his country’s parliament that a peace conference must include Mr. Putin.
“If we are asked, we will also speak with the Russian president,” he said, though he insisted no decisions would be made with the full participation of Ukraine in any peace talks.
• This article is based in part on wire service reports.
• Ben Wolfgang can be reached at bwolfgang@washingtontimes.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment