Yuri Kobzar16:57, 12/27/23

A member of the editorial board of The New York Times is convinced that leaving the war now is more profitable for Ukraine than fighting until complete victory.

Ukraine should not ignore the opportunity to make peace with Russia on the current line of contact, because victory in the war is determined not only by territorial gains and losses. This opinion was published on the pages of The New York Times by the famous publicist and political commentator, member of the editorial board of this newspaper, Serge Schmemann.

Commenting on the recent high-profile publication by The New York Times itself about the Kremlin’s signals of readiness for a peace agreement, Schmemann carefully notes that these signals are both “suspicious and seductive.” He acknowledges that hypothetical peace talks could be a trap for Putin, but calls for a look at the possible benefits.

“If Mr. Putin turns out to be serious [in his intentions to make peace], Ukraine should not lose the opportunity to stop the bloodshed. The conquered territory is not the only indicator of victory in this war,” the observer writes.

Schmemann notes that the war is depleting Ukrainian resources, while there are no prospects for its military end. He in particular refers to problems with American assistance to Ukraine and to a high-profile article by the commander-in-chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine Valery Zaluzhny, in which he recognized a “stalemate situation” at the front.

“The conflict could still take an unexpected turn, as it did before. But at this stage the prospect is a long war of attrition that will cause even more damage to Ukraine, take even more lives and spread instability in Europe,” the journalist said.

He cites the opinion of another publicist, Michael Kimmage, who warns that the endless conflict will deepen Russia’s alienation from the West, entrench Putinism in Russia and delay Ukraine’s integration into Europe. This is why Schmemann considers the deoccupation of all territories of Ukraine to be a “wrong” idea of ​​the best outcome of the war for Kyiv.

“The real victory for Ukraine is to rise from the hell of war as a strong, independent, prosperous and secure state, with a strong hold on the West. This would be exactly what Mr. Putin feared most from a neighboring state with deep historical ties to Russia.” – the observer is convinced.

Schmemann also notes that the world still does not recognize as legitimate Russian control over those territories that will remain under its control after the peace agreement. Meanwhile, continuing the war without a visible victory on the horizon will almost certainly mean for Ukraine the loss of most of the American and European assistance in the form of weapons and finances.

Putin signals readiness for negotiations

The New York Times recently published an article, based on information from anonymous sources in Western diplomatic circles and among former Russian top officials, that Putin is actively sending secret signals to the West about his readiness to immediately conclude a peace agreement on the current line of contact.

Analysts at the American Institute for the Study of War believe that these signals from Putin are just an attempt to mislead Western politicians so that the West will focus on hypothetical negotiations instead of providing Ukraine with enough weapons.

Ukrainian columnist Vitaly Portnikov shares a similar idea . He also notes that even with a real willingness to make peace now, Putin could easily change his mind later, once he feels superior.

(C)UNIAN 2023