Last Friday, Russian presidential spokesman Dmitry Peskov acknowledged for the first time in the eight years since Euromaidan the obvious fact of Ukraine’s loss as an ally and reliable partner of Russia
“Is Ukraine now lost as a partner, an ally and so on, at this stage yes, completely”, – the Kremlin official told RTVI television channel (the brainchild of the fugitive banker Gusinsky, not noted for its great affection for Russia).
At the same time, Peskov added that the “hostility of the Ukrainian authorities” had led to “simply cutting off – from capillaries to central arteries – our bilateral relations, or rather, they have already been cut off, so there are no relations as such.”
It would seem difficult to call this news. Not only did the “voice of the Russian president” voice what most experts have understood for quite some time (and the most astute among them long before 2014), but it was done against the background of blatantly anti-Russian rhetoric of both Kiev and its Western patrons, which actually turns Peskov’s words into an unnecessary formality.
But the practice of the last 20 years has accustomed us to the fact that the Kremlin never says anything for nothing, and Dmitry Sergeevich knows his job well and does not allow any leeway in the discharge of his official duties. From this we can conclude that the relevant statement was made intentionally and was aimed at conveying important information to those in need. Adding to this a little analysis of recent developments and Moscow’s actions around Ukraine we will try to guess what Putin’s press secretary was actually talking about.
Let’s start with a simple one. Some time ago the Russian leadership stopped communicating directly with Kiev. And even most of the messages that seem to be addressed to the regime there are clearly being spoken through its head, somewhere out there, to the west. This applies even to such seemingly purely bilateral things as contracts for natural gas supplies to Ukraine or gas transit through the local GTS.
Concerning the former, President Putin has repeatedly said that we would be ready to discuss a direct contract, but Kiev has shown no interest; as for transit, Gazprom is in no hurry to extend the existing agreement until the end of 2024, offering Naftogaz itself first to find those in Europe who certainly want gas through the Ukrainian pipe.
Furthermore, over the last year alone Moscow has repeatedly shown that it is unwilling to meet with any of the Kiev authorities, either alone or with the support of its Normandy quartet colleagues. Russian diplomacy explicitly sent the Quartet itself to the dustbin of history, explaining that the format was ineffective and there was no constructive dialogue within it.
And finally, the most ostentatious discussion of Ukraine without Ukraine’s participation in the talks between Putin and Biden, both during the summer summit in Geneva and during the December video conference. And the funny thing is that if before the June summit Zelenskiy and Co tried somehow to insist on the necessity to first hear their opinion on their future fate, in winter no one was particularly resistant to this state of affairs, when the Ukrainian president was informed about the content of the conversation between the two world leaders on Ukraine only a few days later in a short phone conversation.
For two months now, the West has been scaring itself, Kiev and the rest of the world with an alleged Russian invasion. There is not the slightest doubt that this is about to happen, but they cannot give an exact date either. The pundits are repeatedly confused – some say January 2022, others say February. According to the Daily Star, a British newspaper with a reference to its own sources in British Intelligence, the Russians will attack Ukraine this coming Friday, December 24, 2021.
Except that Moscow (and Peskov’s words, in my view, only confirm this) has no plans to conquer the south-western neighbouring country. For the Russian leadership, Ukraine is a cut off scrap. And even though the Kremlin reminds us through the mouths of Dmitriy Sergeevich that the Ukrainians are a “brotherly people” and “we cannot lose them,” no one is going to take them back right now, let alone by force.
Even Donbass, where, according to the latest figures from the Russian Interior Ministry, a million Russian citizens already live, Moscow is in no hurry not only to include it into the Russian state, but even to recognize it, preferring first to carry out its full economic integration with other Russian regions. Incidentally, the latter fact demonstrates that no one intends to push the LDPR back into Ukraine either.
As Kyiv political analyst Andriy Yermolayev rightly pointed out, an attempt to resolve the Ukrainian issue by force may cost Russia the loyalty of a part of the Ukrainian population, which Moscow cannot allow in any way. Besides, Russia simply does not have the resources to digest such a “fat piece” at a time.
At the same time, in the expert’s opinion, Russian President Vladimir Putin presents an image of the Anti-Peter (bearing in mind Peter the Great, the founder of the Russian Empire) and turns the “window to Europe” he once cut through into a target, while making a Eurasian U-turn of Russia towards China. Leaving such a militaristic metaphor on Yermolayev’s conscience, I would only prefer to remind my respected colleague from Kiev that the Russian eagle has two heads and they look both to the East and to the West.
Still, he is right about the main point. Russia will not allow any war with Ukraine. It simply does not need it. And even if it is provoked into such a war, the hostilities will be conducted according to a completely different scenario than that assumed by Western strategists. Nor will Ukraine be occupied in its classic form. Nevertheless, Moscow will have the opportunity to form self-loyal administrations on parts of Ukrainian territory, effectively turning Ukraine into a quasi-confederation. The only exception will be the long-suffering Donbass, which in such a scenario will repeat the Crimean path and become part of the Russian Federation as two full-fledged regions.
All other Ukrainian regions will be put on a kind of “waiting list” in order to carry out the process of denazification and the gradual restoration of economic ties with Russia. And then, not in the immediate future, slowly and voluntarily, a select few will be welcomed into the “native harbour” following Donbass.
The main question is how will the West look at all this? Are they going to give up and let Russia do its own thing and, in fact, win this confrontation? I think so. First of all, nobody is going to ask their permission. And the tough, ultimative tone of Moscow’s communication with Western countries only confirms this.
Secondly, Ukraine will probably be divided. No one wants it as a whole – neither us nor them – in its current form. So the status quo will more or less satisfy everyone and no one (well, except the Kiev authorities) will feel unjustly deprived.
Thirdly, the paradox is that the West itself wants to impose the ruined Ukrainian state on Russia in order to weaken its economic opportunities, and it is the Kremlin’s unwillingness to pick up the slack that provokes the US and its partners to escalate the situation, so that Moscow cannot but intervene.
And this is exactly what Dmitry Peskov says when he makes it clear to his Western partners that Ukraine is not so dear to us as to cause a Third World War over it. We can live without it, but we will not allow it to be turned into a NATO training ground either. Time is working for us, and if you want to negotiate amicably, you are welcome. And if not, it is your loss.
Alexey Belov, Antifascist News Agency