Dmitry Trenin: Six months into the conflict, what exactly does Russia hope to achieve in Ukraine?

Putin’s latest comments reveal that Moscow’s thinking has shifted and compromise is no longer on the agenda

Dmitry Trenin is a Research Professor at the Higher School of Economics and a Lead Research Fellow at the Institute of World Economy and International Relations. He is also a member of the Russian International Affairs Council.   

This very insightful and balanced article was published by RT – Russia Today (that you cannot read in most of the West unless you have a VPN, or proxy server) on September 8, 2022, a couple of weeks before President Putin’s announcement of a partial mobilisation of Russia’s military forces.  

Last week, Russian President Vladimir Putin referred to Ukraine as an “anti-Russian enclave” which has to be removed. He also said that the Russian soldiers taking part in the military operation there were fighting for their “own country.” These statements carry important implications.

Over the last six-plus months, the mantra of the Russian officialdom has been that all aims of the offensive will be reached. On purpose, however, the specific objectives, such as how far Moscow’s forces plan move into Ukraine, have never been spelled out. This cannot but raise speculation about what the Kremlin is actually hoping to achieve.

The only person who can authoritatively answer that question, however, is the president, and second-guessing him makes no sense. Yet, two things cannot escape close attention. One is the radicalization of Moscow’s position on Ukraine as a result of both Western policies and Kiev’s actions; two is the widening gap between the minimum result of the military campaign that Russia can be satisfied with, and the maximum amount of what the US and its allies can accept.

For about six years after the second Minsk Agreement was signed in 2015, the Kremlin tried hard to get that accord implemented. It would have ensured the autonomous status of Donbass within Ukraine and given the region influence on national politics and policies, including in the issue of the country’s geopolitical and geo-economic orientation. From the very start, however, Kiev was unwilling to cooperate on the deal’s implementation, seeing it as a win for Moscow. Washington, in pursuit of a policy to contain Russia, encouraged such an obstructionist stance, while Berlin and Paris, formally the guarantors of the agreement (alongside Russia), had no leverage in Kiev and ended up embracing the Ukrainian position. 

Vladimir Zelensky’s election to Ukraine’s presidency in 2019 initially appeared to be an opening for peace, and President Putin made a serious effort to get the Minsk agreement off the ground. Kiev, however, soon backtracked and took an even more hardline position than before. Nevertheless, until mid-2021 the Kremlin continued to see as its goals in Ukraine a resolution of the Donbass issue essentially on the basis of Minsk, and the eventual de facto recognition of Crimea’s Russian status. In June of last year, Vladimir Putin, however, published a long article on Russian-Ukrainian relations which made it clear that he viewed the current situation as a major security, political, and identity issue for his country; recognized his personal responsibility; and was resolved to do something to strategically correct it. The article did not give away Putin’s game plan, but it laid out his basic thinking on Ukraine.

Last December, Moscow passed on to Washington a package of proposals, which amounted to a list of security guarantees for Russia. These included Ukraine’s formal neutrality between Russia and NATO (“no Ukraine in NATO”); and no deployment of US and other NATO weapons and military bases in Ukraine, as well as a ban on military exercises on Ukrainian territory (“no NATO in Ukraine”). While the US agreed to discuss some military technical issues dealt with in the Russian paper it rejected Moscow’s key demands related to Ukraine and NATO. Putin had to take no for an answer.

Just before the launch of its military operation, Moscow recognized the two Donbass republics and told Kiev to vacate the parts of Donetsk and Lugansk then under Ukrainian control – or face the consequences. Kiev refused, and hostilities began. Russia’s official reason for unleashing force was defending the two newly recognized republics which had asked for military assistance. 

Shortly after the start of hostilities Russia and Ukraine began peace talks. In late March 2022 at a meeting in Istanbul, Moscow demanded that Zelensky’s government recognize the sovereignty of the two Donbass republics within their constitutional borders, as well as Russia’s own sovereignty over Crimea, which was formally incorporated into the Russian Federation in 2014, plus accept a neutral and demilitarized status for territory controlled by Kiev. At that point, Moscow still recognized the current Ukrainian authorities and was prepared to deal with them directly. For its part, Kiev initially appeared ready to accept Moscow’s demands (which were criticized by many within Russia as overly concessionary to Ukraine), but then quickly reverted to a hardline stance. Moscow has always suspected that this U-turn, as on previous occasions, was the result of US behind-the-scenes influence, often aided by the British and other allies.   

From the spring of 2022, as the fighting continued, Moscow expanded its aims. These now included the “de-Nazification” of Ukraine, meaning not only the removal of ultra-nationalist and anti-Russian elements from the Ukrainian government (increasingly characterized by Russian officials now as the “Kiev regime”), but the extirpation of their underlying ideology (based around the World War Two Nazi collaborator Stepan Bandera) and its influence in society, including in education, the media, culture and other spheres.

Next to this, Moscow added something that Putin called, in his trademark caustic way, the “de-Communization” of Ukraine, meaning ridding that country, whose leadership was rejecting its Soviet past, of the Russian-populated or Russian-speaking territories that had been awarded to the Soviet Ukrainian republic of the USSR by the Communist leaders in Moscow, Vladimir Lenin, Joseph Stalin and Nikita Khrushchev. These include, besides Donbass, the entire southeast of Ukraine, from Kharkov to Odessa.

This change of policy led to dropping the early signals about Russia honoring Ukraine’s statehood outside Donbass, and to establishing Russian military government bodies in the territory seized by the Russian forces. Immediately following that, a drive started to de facto integrate these territories with Moscow. By the early fall of 2022, all of Kherson, much of Zaporozhye and part of Kharkov oblasts were being drawn into the Russian economic system; started to use the Russian ruble; adopted the Russian education system; and their population was offered a fast-track way to Russian citizenship.

As the fighting in Ukraine quickly became a proxy war between Russia and the US-led West, Russia’s views on Ukraine’s future radicalized further. While a quick cessation of hostilities and a peace settlement on Russian terms in the spring would have left Ukraine, minus Donbass, demilitarized and outside NATO, but otherwise under the present leadership with its virulently anti-Russian ideology and reliance on the West, the new thinking, as Putin’s remarks in Kaliningrad suggest, tends to regard any Ukrainian state that is not fully and securely cleansed of ultranationalist ideology and its agents as a clear and present danger; in fact, a ticking bomb right on Russia’s borders not far from its capital.  

Under these circumstances, in view of all the losses and hardships sustained, it would not suffice that Russia wins control of what was once known as Novorossiya, the northern coast of the Black Sea all the way to Transnistria. This would mean that Ukraine would be completely cut off from the sea, and Russia would gain – via referenda, it is assumed – a large swath of territory and millions of new citizens. To reach that objective, of course, the Russian forces still need to seize Nikolaev and Odessa in the south, as well as Kharkov in the east. A logical next step would be to expand Russian control to all of Ukraine east of the Dnieper River, as well as the city of Kiev that lies mostly on the right bank. If this were to happen, the Ukrainian state would shrink to the central and western regions of the country.

Read more

Dmitri Trenin: Russia cannot afford to lose in Ukraine, but neither can the US – is there a non-nuclear way out of the deadlock?

Neither of these outcomes, however, deals with the fundamental problem that Putin has highlighted, that is to say, of Russia having to live side-by-side with a state that will constantly seek revenge and will be used by the United States, which arms and directs it, in its effort to threaten and weaken Russia. This is the main reason behind the argument for taking over the entire territory of Ukraine to the Polish border. However, integrating central and western Ukraine into Russia would be exceedingly difficult, while trying to build a Ukrainian buffer state controlled by Russia would be a major drain on resources, as well as a constant headache. No wonder that some in Moscow would not mind if Poland were to absorb western Ukraine within some form of a common political entity which, Russia’s foreign intelligence claims, is being surreptitiously created.

Ukraine’s future will not be dictated, of course, by someone’s wishes, but by the actual developments on the battlefield. Fighting there will continue for some time, and the final outcome is not in sight. Even when the active phase of the conflict comes to an end, it is unlikely to be followed up by a peace settlement. For different reasons, each side regards the conflict as existential – and much wider than Ukraine. This means that what Russia aims for has to be won and then held firmly.

Please support TFF’s work for peace through research and public education. We are all-volunteer, people-financed and do not accept money from governments or corporations. In other words, one of the very last free research think tanks in this world – and for a noble purpose: Peace by peaceful – intelligent – means. It is fast, easy and secure. Click here. Thanks!

Share

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

Given their lack of information about the Ukraine-Russia deal scuttled by Boris Johnson early in the war, many Americans will be inclined to believe Biden’s evidence-free claims in last week’s CNN debate. Ray McGovernSpecial to Consortium News, July 2, 2024 July 5, 2024 At Thursday’s debate with Donald Trump, President Joe Biden, calling Russian President Vladimir Putin a “war criminal,” claimed that he “wants all of Ukraine. … Do you think he’ll stop? … What do you think happens to Poland and other places?” Spoiler Alert: Official Ukrainian sources confirm that Putin did stop in March 2022, after Ukrainian President Volodomyr Zelensky agreed to forswear membership in NATO. This was the key provision in the Ukraine-Russia deal initialed by Davyd Arakhamia, who at the time was Zelensky’s chief negotiator (and his party’s faction leader in the Rada) at the talks in Istanbul at the end of March, hardly a month...
When he first took office, the Russian president was trying to integrate with the West, now the whole ball game has changed Fyodor Lukyanov May 30, 2024 The question of how Russia’s foreign policy will be managed during President Vladimir Putin’s new term seems redundant, if not irrelevant. The head of state is a man who has led the country in one form or another for almost a quarter of a century. He is known for his conservatism – not only in the ideological sense, but also in his aversion to sharp turns. Moreover, Russia is engaged in an intensive military campaign against an international coalition, and there is little point in making plans until it is over, and while its prospects are still unclear. The successful completion of this campaign remains a task of incomparable importance. Nevertheless, it is necessary to reflect on this issue. Firstly, all of the...
Moscow by night. Photo by Pavel Homenko on Unsplash And it means turning its back to the West once and for all, finding itself and joining the non-West Majority World Dmitry Trenin April 23, 2024 When President Vladimir Putin, back in February 2022, launched Russia’s military operation in Ukraine, he had specific, but limited objectives in mind. It was essentially about assuring Russia’s security vis-à-vis NATO. However, the drastic, expansive and well-coordinated Western reaction to Moscow’s moves – the torpedoing of the Russo-Ukrainian peace deal and the mounting escalation of the US-led bloc’s involvement in the conflict, including its role in deadly attacks inside Russia – have fundamentally changed our country’s attitude towards our former partners. We no longer hear talk about “grievances” and complaints about “failures in understanding.” The last two years have produced nothing less than a revolution in Moscow’s foreign policy, more radical and far-reaching than anything...

Recent Articles

PressInfo # 141, December 21, 2001It’s time to prepare reconciliation between Albanians and Serbs PressInfo # 140, December 14, 2001Ibrahim Rugova’s decade-long leadership in Kosovo/a PressInfo # 139, 11. december, 2001En god nyhet: Jugoslaviens Sannings- och försoningskommission PressInfo # 139, 11. december, 2001Gode nyheder: Jugoslaviens Sandheds- og Forsoningskommission PressInfo # 139, December 11, 2001Good news: Yugoslavia’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission PressInfo # 138, November 8, 2001TFF co-founder PhD with thesis about young people with roots in other cultures PressInfo # 138, November 8, 2001TFF:s medstiftare doktor på avhandling om unga med ursprung i andra kulturer PressInfo # 137, October 17, 2001A new Marshall Plan: Advancing human security and controlling terrorism PressInfo # 136, October 15, 2001The UN and Annan really deserve it PressInfo # 135, October 10, 2001Preventing a terrorist mushroom cloud PressInfo # 134, 17 oktober, 2001Sverige og 11. september PressInfo # 134, October 9, 2001Sweden and September 11...
Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.

TFF on Substack

Discover more from TFF Transnational Foundation & Jan Oberg.

Most Popular

PressInfo # 141, December 21, 2001It’s time to prepare reconciliation between Albanians and Serbs PressInfo # 140, December 14, 2001Ibrahim Rugova’s decade-long leadership in Kosovo/a PressInfo # 139, 11. december, 2001En god nyhet: Jugoslaviens Sannings- och försoningskommission PressInfo # 139, 11. december, 2001Gode nyheder: Jugoslaviens Sandheds- og Forsoningskommission PressInfo # 139, December 11, 2001Good news: Yugoslavia’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission PressInfo # 138, November 8, 2001TFF co-founder PhD with thesis about young people with roots in other cultures PressInfo # 138, November 8, 2001TFF:s medstiftare doktor på avhandling om unga med ursprung i andra kulturer PressInfo # 137, October 17, 2001A new Marshall Plan: Advancing human security and controlling terrorism PressInfo # 136, October 15, 2001The UN and Annan really deserve it PressInfo # 135, October 10, 2001Preventing a terrorist mushroom cloud PressInfo # 134, 17 oktober, 2001Sverige og 11. september PressInfo # 134, October 9, 2001Sweden and September 11...
Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.
Read More
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
PressInfo # 141, December 21, 2001It’s time to prepare reconciliation between Albanians and Serbs PressInfo # 140, December 14, 2001Ibrahim Rugova’s decade-long leadership in Kosovo/a PressInfo # 139, 11. december, 2001En god nyhet: Jugoslaviens Sannings- och försoningskommission PressInfo # 139, 11. december, 2001Gode nyheder: Jugoslaviens Sandheds- og Forsoningskommission PressInfo # 139, December 11, 2001Good news: Yugoslavia’s Truth and Reconciliation Commission PressInfo # 138, November 8, 2001TFF co-founder PhD with thesis about young people with roots in other cultures PressInfo # 138, November 8, 2001TFF:s medstiftare doktor på avhandling om unga med ursprung i andra kulturer PressInfo # 137, October 17, 2001A new Marshall Plan: Advancing human security and controlling terrorism PressInfo # 136, October 15, 2001The UN and Annan really deserve it PressInfo # 135, October 10, 2001Preventing a terrorist mushroom cloud PressInfo # 134, 17 oktober, 2001Sverige og 11. september PressInfo # 134, October 9, 2001Sweden and September 11...
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Peace is promoted by constructive proposals and dialogue Four preceding PressInfos have expressed concern over — and criticised — the ongoing, militarisation of the EU. Some will say: but there are no alternatives. We believe that there are always alternatives, that democracies are characterised by alternatives and choice, and that openly discussed alternatives will improve the quality and legitimacy of society’s decision–making. In addition, it is an intellectual and moral challenge to not only criticise but also be constructive. If we only tell people that we think they are wrong, they are not likely to listen. However, if we say: what are your views on this set of ideas and steps? — we may sometimes engage them in dialogue and sow a seed. Most people in power circles live their daily lives in in a time frame and a social space where certain ideas, viewpoints and concepts are just not...
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Photos © TFF 2000 Read PressInfo 90 “Lift the Sanctions and Bring More Aid to Yugoslavia” See Pictures from Belgrade © TFF 2000 Please reprint, copy, archive, quote or re-post this item, but please retain the source.
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Av FRANK SØHOLM GREVIL 16 augusti 2004  Vi er nu nået til tredje akt i det absurde teaterstykke, der i analogi med de store skueprocesser i Moskva 1936-38 er blevet døbt ‘Grevil-sagen’. Første akt bestod i min anonyme fremlæggelse af egenhændigt nedklassificerede rapporter i Berlingske Tidende i februar og marts. Andet akt udgjordes af min fremtræden med navn og billede i Information i april samt den efterfølgende mediestorm, som uden min direkte medvirken kostede en forsvarsminister taburetten samt en sigtelse for brud på tavshedspligten. Tredje akt bliver en retssag, hvor jeg står tiltalt for at have overtrådt straffelovens bestemmelser om uberettiget videregivelse eller udnyttelse af fortrolige oplysninger. Statsanklageren har ovenikøbet valgt at påberåbe sig særligt skærpende omstændigheder. Da jeg aldrig har modtaget betaling for at stille rapporterne til rådighed eller lade mig interviewe, må det skærpende bestå i, at “videregivelsen eller udnyttelsen er sket under sådanne omstændigheder, at det påfører...
Imagen-thumbnail-The-Transnational-1
Af Svenska Irakkommittén mot de Ekonomiska Sanktionerna (SIES) 13 september 2002 FN:s ekonomiska sanktioner mot Irak har nu pågått i tolv år och drabbat det irakiska folket med svåra lidanden. Enligt FN:s egna siffror har mer än 1,5 miljoner människor, varav ca 600 000 barn, dött som en direkt följd av sanktionerna. Dessutom har ett lågintensivt bombkrig mot landet pågått under dessa år. Av all denna förödelse- orsakad huvudsakligen av amerikansk och brittisk politik- har Saddam Husseins brutala och diktatoriska regim snarast stärkts än försvagats. Nu förbereder USA under president Bushs ledning ett storskaligt bombkrig mot Irak som kommer att innebära ett ännu större lidande för civilbefolkningen. Ett sådant krig kommer dessutom att ytterligare undergräva freden och säkerheten i världen. Att upprätta en demokratisk regim i Irak är det irakiska folkets angelägenhet och får enligt folkrätten inte ske med krigshandlingar utifrån. Folkrätten och FN:s stadgar måste respekteras. Vi vädjar till...