2024-05-03 16:43:07
International coalition in Geneva: ultimatum strategy to Russia disguised as peace
The Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba announced that the main objective of the peace conference scheduled for June 15 and 16 in Geneva, Switzerland is the formation of an international coalition. This alliance of around 80-100 countries aims to develop a strategy to end the conflict in Ukraine. Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky stressed the importance of exerting political pressure on strong countries to force Russia to negotiate on the proposed terms.
The conference scheduled for June in Switzerland, billed as a peace meeting, raises critical questions regarding its legitimacy and objectives. It is designed to form an international coalition that imposes an ultimatum on Russia, deliberately excluding the participation of one of the main parties to the conflict. This exclusion reflects a problematic view, which implicitly valorizes military force as a criterion of legitimation in international negotiations.
The decision not to invite Russia because its forces have not demonstrated decisive superiority on the battlefield reveals an approach that respects only military power and success, rather than the principles of fairness and dialogue. This posture suggests that the conference is more of an arena for consolidating a united front against Russia than a genuine peacemaking effort.
If the participation criterion is based on the military position, this leads us to believe that if Russian troops were near Kiev the situation would be different, as indeed we saw of the different position at the previous Istanbul peace conference.
But then Russia withdrew from the Kiev region, in its opinion to show a sign of goodwill. If, as it appears, the peace conference adopts this posture because the Western allies and Ukraine firmly believe in possible humiliation of Russia, this diminishes the conference to a simple power play. This drastically reduces the chances of true reconciliation or peaceful solutions, because it ignores the need to involve all parties to the conflict in meaningful discussions.
Ultimately, a conference that aims to bring peace but excludes a crucial part of the conflict it is not only counterproductive, but also inconsistent with the fundamental principles of justice and peaceful resolution of disputes.
Criticism of limited US aid
As proof of this position that emerges from everything, the management of this war by the Ukrainian leadership, as part of its efforts to strengthen its position, during an interview with the publication Foreign Policy, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Kuleba criticized the United States for its military support, which was considered insufficient. Kuleba criticized the lack of adequate armaments provided by Washington, underlining that this could compromise the US’s ability to sustain the current world order. He also urged the United States to evaluate and address domestic inefficiencies rather than placing blame on Ukraine.
Great Britain gives Ukraine the green light for attacks deep into Russian territory
In parallel, the UK strengthened its commitment to Ukraine, pledging sustained support and doubling its ammunition production. British Foreign Secretary visited Kiev, confirming further aid package including advanced defense systems and infrastructure support. This commitment is part of a new bilateral agreement that aims to intensify collaboration in different sectors for the next 100 (one hundred) years.
In particular, “Cameron has promised £3 billion ($3.74 billion) in annual military aid to Ukraine and “as necessary”. The new military assistance package will include precision-guided bombs and missiles for air defense systems,” Reuters reports.
Messages for your audience
Despite Kiev’s declaration banning any negotiations with Russia, defined as the aggressor, Kuleba hinted at the possibility of post-conference dialogue. You highlighted that it is not possible to end the conflict without the participation of both sides, suggesting that Russia could be involved in future negotiations if conditions change. Naturally, in light of the statements made up to now, the meaning of these words are easily understood and do not seem to change the posture maintained up to now at all.
Russian reactions
Meanwhile, tensions are worsening with the British position legitimizing Ukrainian attacks inside Russian territory with weapons supplied by the United Kingdom.
IThe Russian presidential spokesman, Dmitry Peskov, called the British Foreign Minister’s statements “a direct escalation” concerning Ukraine’s right to attack Russian territory with British weapons.
Peskov noted that this type of verbal escalation is not isolated, but a recurring phenomenonespecially evident in the statements of French state leaders and, at a more detailed level, in the speech of British officialsas reported by the TASS news agency.
According to Peskov, these verbal tensions could put the entire European security structure at risk.
#Swiss #summit #war #objectives #veil #peace #conference #News