|
Ukraine Peace Talks – A Grown Up Is Taking Charge
The U.S. is unwilling to yet give up in its proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. Russia can not stop the war without securing its legitimate interest to keep NATO and/or the U.S. out of its neighbor state. A loss of the war would create an existential danger for Russia.
With the two major powers engaged in a war a third party is needed to solve the conflict.
In the spring of last year Turkey and Israel successfully helped to find a peace agreement. A good solution was found and Russia as well as Ukraine agreed to it. But the U.S. needed the war to continue. It sent the British prime minister Boris Johnson to Kiev to sabotage the deal. The Ukrainian president was told that the country would lose all 'western' support should it sign an agreement with Russia.
As the somewhat neutral middle powers were unable to push any agreement through it became obvious that a third party with more heft was needed to seal a deal.
The time of moving towards a deal also needed to be right. On February 24, exactly a year after the war had started, China announced its Position on the Political Settlement of the Ukraine Crisis. This was not a peace plan but a lay out of things that will need to be understood and done to come to a sustainable solution of the crisis.
A months later China took the next step that will be needed in the process. It introduced a high ranking diplomat who will hold the preliminary talks in Ukraine and Russia to find the potential ways to proceed. The announcement was made after a phone call between the presidents Xi and Zelensky:
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said he held a “long and meaningful call” with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Wednesday, a long-anticipated first contact between the leaders since Russia’s invasion 14 months ago.
Xi appealed for negotiations between Moscow and Kyiv to begin, according to a Chinese government readout of the call, which Beijing said Zelenskyy requested.
Xi pledged to send a "special representative" to Ukraine for talks about a "political settlement" — warning that "there is no winner in a nuclear war."
China hopes to become a neutral peace broker in the conflict, although the U.S. and others have questioned its impartiality given a "no limits" partnership in which it has lent Moscow rhetorical and financial support.
I am not aware of any 'financial support' by China to Russia as NBC News is claiming here. Even U.S. intelligence says that Russia does not need more money to continue the war:
U.S. intelligence holds that Russia will be able to fund the war in Ukraine for at least another year, even under the heavy and increasing weight of unprecedented sanctions, according to leaked U.S. military documents.
China' readout on the call alludes to the previous proposal and offers to build on it:
With rational thinking and voices now on the rise, it is important to seize the opportunity and build up favorable conditions for the political settlement of the crisis. It is hoped that all parties would seriously reflect on the Ukraine crisis and jointly explore ways to bring lasting peace and security to Europe through dialogue. China will continue to facilitate talks for peace and make its efforts for early ceasefire and restoration of peace. China will send the Special Representative of the Chinese Government on Eurasian Affairs to Ukraine and other countries to have in-depth communication with all parties on the political settlement of the Ukraine crisis. China has sent multiple batches of humanitarian assistance to Ukraine and will keep providing help to the best of its ability.
The Chinese special representative for Eurasian affairs is Lu Hui, a very senior diplomat.
He has held several positions in China's embassies in Moscow and Astana as well as within China's Ministry of Foreign Affairs:
In 2008-2009 Mr. Liu Hui served as a deputy Minister of Foreign Affairs of the PRC.
From August 2009 to August 2019 he served as an Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipotentiary of the People's Republic of China to the Russian Federation.
Ukraine's readout of the call does not mention the envoy. The U.S. response to the announcement of an envoy was designed to put China's efforts into doubt:
John Kirby, the National Security Council's coordinator for strategic communications, said the U.S. welcomed the call as a "good thing."
"We’ve been saying for quite some time that we believe it’s important for President Xi and PRC officials to avail themselves of the Ukrainian perspective on this illegal and unprovoked invasion by Russia," Kirby told reporters, referring to China by the initials for its formal name, the People's Republic of China.
Earlier, Kirby, told NBC News, "We will let these two leaders speak to the details of their conversation."
A senior administration official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said it was "way too soon after just getting word of this conversation to speculate about" whether the call should foster optimism about China's peace plan.
"Thus far, China has not shown itself to be unbiased when it comes to supporting Russia," the official said.
I have no doubt that Li Hui will do his best to achieve some progress in talks with Ukraine and Russia. His most difficult task is to bring the U.S. on board of any potential solution.
But with more doubts coming up over Kiev's ability to successfully launch the announced counteroffensive being voiced every day the mood in Washington may well be changing.
China is addressing the root of this conflict and the basis of the Kiev regime, which came to power, essentially because it held out the hope of a better trade deal than the one that Yanukovych had negotiated with Russia.
As every election has shown there is no popular base for the Nazis who, as agents of NATO, run the country and dictate to Zelensky. They only managed to achieve power by holding out the hope to Ukrainians that the EU and NATO were offering them a chance to jump on the gravy train of western european and American living standards by rejecting Russian and, by implication, Chinese promises of co-operative development based on the BRI and cheap Russian energy.
It was the standard colour revolution package of conjuring up of the American Dream- high wages, social mobility, denims, drugs and sex and rock n roll. And all under the unrivalled military might of Uncle Sam and his satrapy.
It didn’t need to work- Ukrainians who had been travelling around Europe looking for work understood that the good times were over, and a lot of them knew that, for millions of poor Europeans, in countries on the periphery, as Ukraine was, the good times had never been realised.
The EU that Ukraine was being offered was a community in crisis, a community with Greece’s blood on its hands, undemocratic, neo-liberal, promoting austerity, cutbacks and Graz like assaults on the Welfare State.
But there was enough residual support from stupid people and wishful thinkers that, allied with the foreign based fascist movements, the intellectual fruit of twenty years of russophobic and anti-socialist indoctrination and a legion of agitators and organisers on the US and NATO payrolls- what fools call NGOs- billions of dollars worth of full time campaigners that, together with the Security Services of NATO and the assistance of trained assassins and death squads from Special Services that Maidan succeeded and power was unequivocally transferred to US agents.
And all was based on a vague belief that prosperity would come by handing the country over to its ‘friends’ in NATO- an organisation designed to conquer and loot Ukraine, and the rest of the Soviet Union, from the first.
It is now clear to Ukrainians that the country is set on course for misery and slavery.
If the US prevails everything moveable will be auctioned off at bargain prices and the proceeds sent to Financiers in the west. Living standards, already the lowest in Europe will plummet, the economy will return to the conditions beloved by neo-liberals: no Unions, no workers rights, no guarantees of employment, the war of all against all, a race to the bottom, back to the 1830s.
The finest and most fertile agricultural land in Europe will be given to the people who brought America the Dust Bowl.
Those who think the war is bad will look back on these as the good times before they became dispensible, times when the Nazis and NATO needed their support to carry on the war.
Exactly what China is offering it is impossible to say, but it is certain that rebuilding Ukraine’s industry, employing its skilled and educated labour force, harvesting its enormous agricultural potential and exploiting its strategic position (the lynch pin of east-west trade between the Mediterranean and Central Asia and China) would restore Ukrainian living standards as surely as becoming an ill nourished milch cow for the City and Wall St would lead to deepening poverty, famine and social disaster.
Whatever China offers the West cannot begin to compete with, not because China is wealthier but because while China controls its wealth in the West wealth controls the government. And there is no chance of Ukrainians being relieved of the burden that has been placed on its population in the past thirty years and in the last nine, in particular.
Posted by: bevin | Apr 27 2023 22:08 utc | 104
Karlof1 @42
I always appreciate your posts. You referred to solutions only being revealed, indeed only being available, in the fullness of time. I wonder if you have seen and have thoughts about Gurylov (sp?) referring to a plan of conflict out to 2030, as one of the contingencies being developed by RF strategic planners.
As Surovikin himself announced, RF’s strategy was and still seems to be one of a slow grind–attrition and economy of forces. Even now, many knowledgeable Western analysts continue to forecast a massive Russian fist coming to crush what’s left of the UAF, and many of these analysts find themselves now having to explain, again and yet again, why it hasn’t happened yet. MacGregor & Ritter being two of the most knowledgeable.
Perhaps Martyanov is right–that American military/strategic thinking is overly influenced by the Wehrmacht (the losers of WW2, as he tirelessly points out), who impressed on the Western front, but greatly obfuscated the reasons for their destruction by the Red Army.
At any rate, though gradually insightful commentators–even on the proWestern side–have come to acknowledge that what they are seeing in Bakhmut is a grinding strategy–whether designed by RF or opportunistically exploited by them, given Ukraine’s sacralization of holding territory and its war-marketing needs.
I have, however, not seen any Western observer coming to the conclusion that the Donbas itself is Bakhmut writ large–Donbas is the larger meat grinder, and the primary reason RF forces don’t move more quickly is because they don’t want to–economy of forces, of course.
But if, after Bojo blew up the Istanbul peace negotiation and promised that NATO was all in, RF realized that they were now at war with NATO, then where would you choose to fight NATO–near the Russian borders, or all the way to the Polish border? Fight NATO *from* the Donbas, or fight NATO all the way to Poland?
In SE Ukraine you are fighting NATO over meaningful territory that everyone in RF believes you have to liberate and protect anyway–but you are close to your logistics, you have a blocking force in Belarus, and not only does NATO have to send logistics across a free-fire zone 1000km across, but it has to support the Ukrainian state. That 1000km more or less neutralizes NATO’s air force. Too far, too unguarded, while leaving any significant target *in* that 1000km expanse more or less defenseless against the superior RF missile forces.
Anyway, picture Russia grinding forward at, say, 5km per month, as the West pours 10 billion a month into the war and another 10 billion/month to support Ukraine’s economy and population. NATO is at least 2 years away from even the *possibility* of gearing up its defense-industrial output, have still, after more than a year, not actually taken serious steps to do so, and at the moment lacks the business model that would permit them to produce an MIC that can match Russia that will be pulling farther and farther ahead in the meantime.
The slow grind (5 km / month) offers opportunities for Russia to continue to manage escalation–keeps Poland and the neocons thinking they still have time, since Russia is so weak it is hardly advancing. Meanwhile Russia continues to build strength as the trends of Western decline that made Russia so keen to play for time *before* the SMO have actually been accelerated *by* the SMO.
As the Europe de-energizes, Germany de-industrializes, the World de-dollarizes, the financialized economies sink deeper into debt, financing costs increase, strategic resources and industrial products are increasingly imported, and structural inflation builds for years before most see that inflation is a stealth currency erosion, Global South debt-trap financing dries up, and disposable income that the Golden Billion had to finance their showroom-queen militaries are vanishing.
The year 2030: 60 kms per year x 7 year = 420 kms across what used to Ukraine. Is there still a Ukraine? 30,000 UKR KIA per month, is there anything left of UKR mobilization potential by 2030? Is there a NATO, an EU–a USA even?
Posted by: Paul Damascene | Apr 28 2023 1:47 utc | 137
@ Oriental Voice | 58
Today’s Taiwan means nothing to China beside an impact on its global image. China does not relish the rule of Taiwan, with a population develishly brainwashed to hate their own heritage, lazy and incompetent in the same mode and image and their idols-the West and Japan-, and societal order deteriorating just like their idol the West. It’s the same as Hong Kong. Is China eager to actually rule Hong Kong??? Hell no! Just let it twist in the wind on its own, as it wished.
Literally nothing you assert in this paragraph is true or accurate.
Taiwan is a key geostrategic location for both China and the US. For the US, keeping Taiwan separate from China means that the Taiwan Strait remains open to the US fleet. Taiwan sits on the very edge of the continental shelf, so a submarine fleet operating out of Taiwan would never have to move through shallow waters; it would have immediate access to the deepest waters of the ocean. Possession of Taiwan puts Chinese territorial waters almost right up against Filipino waters, and would largely restrict the US fleet to Filipino waters for any operations.
Taiwan’s mountains are an ideal place for air force bases, and its agricultural potential–fruit that is subtropical, tropical, and temperate, and of course rice–is just phenomenal. Then there is the potential for geothermal and wave energy.
Politically, an independent Taiwan that is allied with Japan and the US is a grave threat to Chinese security.
But now let’s re-examine your assertion that Taiwanese are “develishly brainwashed to hate their own heritage”: that is just a straight up fiction. I suspect you likely believe it to be true, but it is not. Taiwan, in fact, is–among all of the majority-Chinese states out there–the most traditionally Chinese of them all. Chinese religion, philosophy, and traditions are far stronger here than they are in Hong Kong, Singapore, or any Chinatown out in the world at large. However, I suspect what you mean is that Taiwanese are “brainwashed” to “hate” mainland Chinese. That, too, is simply not true.
There are a scant few loci in Taiwan where the Taiwanese elites truly do despise mainland China. Foremost among them is Gaoxiong (Kaohsiung), where the urban elites are most certainly dominated by an “Independent Taiwan” mentality. However, Gaoxiong’s urban elites are notoriously stupid and backwards.
Taipei elites are largely pro-Unification. Taizhong elites are split, with a slight inclination towards unification. In south Taiwan, most rural areas outside of Gaoxiong county are pretty evenly split regarding unification. In north, central, and eastern Taiwan, most of the rural population–by far–quietly supports an eventual unification.
It is only in the urban areas where the rank-and-file Taiwanese are generally opposed to unification, and even then it is pretty clearly the poorly educated working-class people (small shopkeepers, laborers, etc) and idiot youths who are loudly opposed. In both Taizhong and Taipei, the professional classes mostly support unification, albeit quietly.
Few Taiwanese support unification now, though, because they fear a steep decline in their quality of life should they do so. That opinion is slowly changing, however, as China increasingly proves its capacity to deliver a high standard of living.
I say this as a man who has lived in central, rural Taiwan for over 6 years and who, in the course of my time in Taiwan, has worked with literally thousands of Taiwanese with whom, as a paid consultant, I have intimately discussed this very topic. Among my current neighbors–and keep in mind, I live in the middle of a bunch of rice-fields–I can list about 15 different households who have quietly confided in me that they support unification. Among these householders are engineers, financial managers, farmers, and shopkeepers.
So no: literally nothing in that paragraph of yours is true.
Posted by: Pacifica Advocate | Apr 28 2023 3:01 utc | 146
|
