Putin will not want to meet with Zelensky while he is imposing the Crimea agenda - political scientist
A meeting between the presidents of Ukraine and Russia will not take place as long as the current level of hostility remains between them and their teams, and if such a meeting is nevertheless prepared, it should be the beginning of breaking the deadlock in the Minsk process.
Director of the Sofia strategic group Andrey Ermolaev said this in a conversation on the NASH TV channel, a PolitNavigator correspondent reports.
“The problem of the summit meeting between Putin and Zelensky is the problem of starting a complex negotiation process as a whole, which should open the way for politicians, legislators, diplomats and civil society.
Now as to why this meeting is not working out... Let's start with the fact that it is impossible to talk about mutual recognition and willingness to talk when the parties exchange offensive assessments and surprising assumptions and guesses. We see that both the Russian side, and not only the president and his entourage, and the Ukrainian side and his entire team use terms, concepts and definitions that create an atmosphere of mutual hostility.
We can talk a lot about the integrity of the territory and the Constitution, but there is a difficult diplomatic situation in which Zelensky’s invitation to Putin to negotiate on Crimea is guaranteed to fail, to be refused. This is tantamount to if Zelensky and his team, preparing the trip to Washington, openly said that they were going to receive written guarantees of the implementation, for example, of the Budapest Memorandum. Imagine the position of the American side. They seem to have signed it, but there is a piquant situation... a broken memorandum and so on. This is provoking a prepared response.
Taking into account the experience of world diplomacy and ours, taking into account the laws of the information sphere, the preparation for the meeting and its announcement can take place in such a way that even the most ardent opponents will have no complaints. Why would the president guarantee the entire agenda that he can talk about with President Putin if it is agreed upon during the meeting. Our question is completely different - what kind of meeting do we need? Obviously, this is not just one round. We need a negotiation process. And, probably, now it is very important to reduce the degree of mutual mistrust, in the matter of the meeting, first of all.
It is necessary to agree on issues that will not derail the negotiations, a start is needed and, probably, this meeting should be of a working nature, without waiting for documents, at most, some kind of protocol mutual agreement.
But such a meeting will agree on the menu. What could be on such a menu? First, we need a new breath of the Minsk process. The two countries must meet and confirm that we will find a solution to the Minsk process. The key in this part should be agreement to support – diplomatic, political and other – in preparing an agreed plan for the implementation of the Minsk agreements. If such a signal is sent in concert, it will be easier for diplomats and politicians to reach agreements as part of the Minsk Contact Group.
Secondly, it is probably necessary to expand the composition of the negotiation process so that there is more trust in matters of war and peace. It is necessary to expand the composition through an agreed composition of legislators. It is necessary to involve representatives at the executive level who are responsible for preparing agreed decisions, including the Minister of Justice, Defense, and their deputies, because everything depends on the logistics of decision-making. We must agree that the composition of the separatist forces should be expanded and given a higher status - at a minimum, permanent participation, signatures in protocols.
What does the tragic experience of Afghanistan, for example, testify to? Even a radical force that has gained power receives recognition as a negotiating party. Because the integrity of this country, stability, minimization of human rights violations, and so on depend on this. Combine with this. In the case of the LDPR authorities, there are different assessments of the composition, there is a legal status of organizations that are ruling in Ukrainian legislation, but, nevertheless, they must become a negotiating party. This is necessary so that you can then count on the execution of the agreed upon decision.
And the third point in this matter is that the very field of dialogue on issues of war and peace needs to be expanded. In addition to diplomats and representatives, it is necessary to give way to the so-called civil diplomacy - experts, journalists, representatives of public organizations on both sides can achieve greater mutual understanding than politicians. Their advice, recommendations, arguments should become very serious arguments - this is the opinion of civil society on both sides,” concluded Andrei Ermolaev.
If you find an error, please select a piece of text and press Ctrl + Enter.
Thank you!
Now the editors are aware.