Recently, Russia released a draft security agreement, which put forward the following demands: prohibiting any expansion of NATO; prohibiting the United States from establishing US military bases in the former Soviet Union countries that are not members of NATO; prohibiting the United States from using any military activities for the purpose of Infrastructure facilities in the territory of the member states of the Soviet Union, or the development of bilateral military cooperation with these countries; require NATO to promise to never expand the list of member states and never carry out any military activities on the territories of eastern European countries such as Ukraine, southern Caucasus countries, and Central Asian countries Wait. While making demands, Russia also showed goodwill, hoping to reach a new security agreement with NATO to avoid conflicts caused by the situation in Ukraine, and hoped that the two sides could resolve the current predicament through treaty negotiations. Although NATO directly and publicly rejected the above-mentioned request made by Russia, these proposals can still be regarded as a major process node in the Ukraine issue, and may even cause a dramatic change in the whole event. Why do I make such a judgment?
Earlier, U.S. intelligence officials told the media that Russia had moved 70,000 soldiers and equipment to its border with Ukraine in preparation for a possible invasion early next year. Moscow, however, denies any intention to invade Ukraine and accuses Ukrainian authorities of planning an offensive to retake eastern Ukraine, which is held by pro-Russian militants, while Ukraine denies Russia’s accusations.
This situation is a common crisis form in geopolitics. The directly participating countries and their backers in the region do not trust each other, and they expect that the other party may launch an attack on themselves. Therefore, they improve themselves by increasing their military deployment in the region. deterrence and security. However, the ever-increasing deployment of troops and upgraded weapons and equipment on both sides and even multiple parties will further cause tension and even cause the situation to get out of control.
This situation can only develop in two directions. The first is the direct outbreak of armed conflict, such as the partial military conflict between Georgia and Russia in 2008, and the conflict between Armenia and Azerbaijan last year. The second scenario is through a new security protocol that allows both parties or even multiple parties involved to reach a new balance, while establishing a secure communication channel to avoid deterioration of the form. The disarmament agreement reached between the United States and the Soviet Union during the Cold War, as well as the secret diplomatic negotiations in the Cuban missile crisis, are typical examples of resolving the crisis through negotiation and diplomacy.
Judging from the current development situation, Ukraine’s problems are much more serious than those of the former Soviet Union member states such as Georgia and Armenia. After all, U.S. troops are already stationed in its territory. If a conflict breaks out directly, there may be force between the two nuclear powers. confrontation, leading to a total out-of-control situation in Europe. Fighting between the Ukrainian army and Russian-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine has been going on for years, with the civil war on and off since the 2014 Ukraine crisis. The seven-year war has killed more than 14,000 people and devastated Ukraine’s eastern industrial city of Donbass. Both sides of the conflict have been exhausted after years of fighting, and Russia has also been deeply involved in the previous battle. Even so, it only stabilized the situation in the east and prevented the militia from being wiped out by Ukraine, but did not form an overwhelming effect on the Ukrainian army. Advantage. If Russia launches a full-scale invasion of Ukraine, not only may a direct conflict with the United States break out, but the strength of the Russian military will not be able to fully occupy Ukraine for a long time, and it may fall into the quagmire of a protracted war. Although the two sides are now at war with each other, they are actually “fearing at both ends”. Therefore, although Russia has 100,000 troops on the border, it does not seem to be determined to invade in an all-round way, not to mention that with the size of Ukraine, it is really impossible to invade with a 100,000-strong army. must be enough.
Ukrainian soldiers patrol the front line in Katerinivka, Donetsk, December 7, 2021. Figure/Visual China
It can be seen from Russia’s initiative to propose the conditions of a new security agreement that the senior Putin government still wants to use the threat of force to promote negotiations and protect its own geopolitical interests. Although Russia is regarded as an aggressor on the Ukraine issue, its logic is to attack and defend, and prevent Ukraine from joining the EU through military operations in Crimea and eastern Ukraine. A buffer zone for Western powers. In the long run, Russia is trying to recapture a little bit of its lost sphere of influence as the West pushes closer. As for the security agreement proposed by Russia, it is also hoped that NATO will not completely turn Ukraine, Georgia and other former Soviet member states into bridgeheads, so as to avoid too much strategic pressure on its western border. Therefore, from Chen Bing 100,000 to putting forward conditions for negotiation, it is a step-by-step calculation by Moscow. The reason why I say this is an important node of the event is also based on this consideration. Russia has made its demands clear. Although NATO has publicly refused, it has also expressed its willingness to talk. This undoubtedly leaves a solution to the cooling of the incident. From this point of view, the Ukraine war should not be fought. This is about It’s good news before New Year’s Day.