Peace deal is closer than ever before, but not close enough | Sky analysis

Key Concepts

• Ukrainian Delegation: Led by Rustam Umerov (National Security and Defense Board) and including Budanov (Chief of Staff, Military Intelligence), Kizlitzia (Budanov’s deputy), and General Natov (Chief of the General Staff).
• Russian Delegation: Primarily military, led by Kostukov and Kyukov (GRU Chief), suggesting limited political authority for negotiation.
• Donbass Region: The focal point of the conflict, with Russia controlling approximately 90% and Ukraine holding roughly 20%, particularly around key “fortress cities.”
• Fortress Cities: Strategically important locations (e.g., Prosk, Avdiivka) offering Ukraine defensive advantages due to high ground, crucial for preventing further Russian advances.
• Putin’s Long-Term Goals: The assessment that Putin’s ultimate ambition remains the complete absorption of Ukraine into the Russian Federation, despite potential temporary concessions.
• Negotiation Prospects: Pessimistic outlook on immediate breakthroughs, with the possibility of talks facilitating a larger, more prepared summit in the future.

Ukrainian and Russian Delegations: A Disparity in Authority

The current talks feature significantly different delegations from Ukraine and Russia. The Ukrainian side is represented by a high-level team led by Rustam Umerov, formerly the defense minister and now on the National Security and Defense Board. Umerov is described as skilled, multilingual, and capable, though his previous position was impacted by a corruption scandal, prompting Zelenskyy to distance himself. Alongside Umerov are key figures like Kyrylo Budanov, the current Chief of Staff and head of military intelligence (previously implicated in a corruption scandal as well, leading to his appointment by Zelenskyy), his deputy Kizlitzia, and General Natov, the Chief of the General Staff. This composition indicates Ukraine is prepared to engage in substantive negotiations.

In contrast, the Russian delegation appears to be almost entirely military, headed by Kostukov and Kyukov, the latter being the head of the GRU (Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye Upravleniye – Main Intelligence Directorate) since 2018. Kyukov is sanctioned by both the EU and the US for alleged interference in the 2016 US presidential election and is characterized as a “no compromise” figure trusted by Putin. The lack of prominent political figures suggests Russia intends to present its terms without genuine negotiation, focusing on on-the-ground realities rather than broader political settlements. Professor Clark posits this demonstrates Russia isn’t taking the talks “terribly seriously.”

The Strategic Importance of the Donbass Region

The core issue driving the conflict and these negotiations remains territorial control, specifically the Donbass region. Currently, Russia controls approximately 90% of the Donbass, leaving Ukraine holding around 20%, primarily in the western part of the region. This area is defined by a series of “fortress cities” – heavily defended locations like Prosk and Avdiivka.

The Russians took Avdiivka 23 months ago, and Prosk has been a target for an extended period (nearly two years), despite repeated Russian claims of capture. Full control of Prosk remains elusive. These cities are strategically vital because they occupy the high ground. Giving up these positions would leave the Ukrainian defenses vulnerable, allowing Russia to easily advance westward towards the Nepra River and potentially threaten Kyiv.

Putin’s Ambitions and the Future of Ukraine

Professor Clark emphasizes that despite any potential for temporary agreements, Putin’s ultimate goal remains the complete annexation of Ukraine. He cites Putin’s consistent statements and actions as evidence, asserting that he views Ukraine as an illegitimate state that rightfully belongs to Russia.

“He says that or he implies he’d settle for the Donbass now for a ceasefire but nobody thinks that that’s the extent of his ambitions because I mean all the evidence is that he regards Ukraine as an illegitimate state that it should be part of Russia. It doesn't have any right to exist. He wants the whole of Ukraine,” Clark stated.

Even if Putin were to temporarily accept a ceasefire focused on the Donbass, it is widely believed this would be a strategic pause before attempting to seize the rest of Ukraine at a later date – “six months, a year, three years, five years.”

Negotiation Outlook and Potential Pathways Forward

The overall assessment of the current talks is pessimistic. The best-case scenario, according to Professor Clark, is that these discussions facilitate a larger, more comprehensive summit involving the leaders of Russia, Ukraine, and potentially other key players.

This future summit would require significant preparation and would need to occur outside of Moscow, as Zelenskyy would not risk traveling there. The ultimate goal of such a summit would be to negotiate and sign a lasting ceasefire agreement with clearly defined details.

Clark draws a parallel to former President Trump’s negotiation style, noting the tendency to create last-minute summits that require frantic preparation. He suggests avoiding this approach and prioritizing a well-prepared, politically significant meeting.

Technical Terms & Concepts

• GRU (Glavnoye Razvedyvatelnoye Upravleniye): Russia’s Main Intelligence Directorate, a powerful military intelligence agency.
• Nepra River: A significant geographical feature in Ukraine, serving as a potential line of defense and a gateway towards Kyiv.
• Fortress Cities: Heavily fortified urban centers used for strategic defense, particularly in the Donbass region.

Logical Connections

The discussion progresses logically from an analysis of the delegations involved, highlighting the imbalance in political representation. This leads to a detailed examination of the strategic importance of the Donbass region and the “fortress cities” within it. The analysis then expands to address the underlying motivations of Vladimir Putin and his long-term objectives for Ukraine, providing context for the pessimistic outlook on the negotiations. Finally, the conversation concludes with a discussion of potential pathways forward, emphasizing the need for a more comprehensive and well-prepared summit.

Data & Statistics

• Russia controls approximately 90% of the Donbass region.
• Ukraine holds approximately 20% of the Donbass region.
• Avdiivka was taken by Russia 23 months ago.
• Russia has been attempting to capture Prosk for nearly two years.

Conclusion

The current talks between Ukraine and Russia are viewed with skepticism due to the disparity in the delegations’ authority and the fundamental disagreement over territorial control and Ukraine’s future. While a breakthrough is unlikely in the immediate term, the discussions could potentially pave the way for a larger, more substantive summit involving the leaders of both countries. However, the underlying issue of Putin’s long-term ambitions for Ukraine remains a significant obstacle to any lasting peace agreement. The strategic importance of the Donbass region, particularly the “fortress cities,” underscores the high stakes involved and the potential for continued conflict.