Fate of Putin's war against Ukraine to be decided at G20 summit

Our Western partners, out of all scenarios for confronting Russian imperialism, choose negotiations with it. All because Biden sees more risks in Trump than in Putin.

If Washington finally allowed Kyiv full use of long-range missiles on Russian territory, it would send a clear signal to the Kremlin: we will negotiate with you only when we've driven you back. But in reality, the message was quite the opposite.

Formally, the United States is hiding behind an intelligence report that once again described the Kremlin's red lines and the risk of escalation.  According to the intelligence services, Russia is likely to respond “with tougher action against the United States and its allies, possibly with deadly attacks, if American, British and French missiles are allowed to strike deep into Russian territory,” the New York Times reported.

This is only partly true: NATO has already crossed numerous Putin "red lines" without consequence, so the current "concern" about sparing Russia from missile strikes is mainly driven by the U.S. elections. Biden’s team fears that even a small retaliatory move by Putin over long-range strikes could be seized upon by Trump to discredit Kamala Harris as an electoral contender. Additionally, partners are increasingly reluctant to pour the funds needed to secure Ukraine’s military superiority over Moscow on the altar of democracy’s victory.

“Globally, the partners' position on the future of Putin's war has not yet been agreed upon.”

Biden is now a point of caution for Scholz. The position of both of them is readable: Biden has an election, Scholz is facing economic stagnation, and he is already hinting that it is time for talks between Putin and Zelenskyy again.

Britain and France will continue to pressure Scholz and Biden to adopt a different stance among allies in the war - forcing Putin to negotiate solely from a position of strength, as the West's visible weakness will only strengthen Russia. Therefore, most European countries advocate for ongoing support for Ukraine and the allowance of long-range strikes: for Europe, this is a global conflict that threatens world stability.

This may seem like a coincidence, but Biden and Scholz put the brakes on Ukrainian aid at the exact moment when the countries of the Global South began to gas the China-Brazil (in fact, the Russian) “peace plan.” And this is happening on the eve of the November 18-19 G20 summit in Brazil, where the beneficiaries of war and peace will meet.

China, along with its political satellites, has formed an international group for "ending the war," which will "play a constructive role in the political resolution of the Ukrainian issue." Beijing has rallied a club of Putin supporters, including Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Mexico, Kenya, Zambia, Kazakhstan, and even Hungary.

At the recent meeting in New York, the phrase "we should talk to Putin" was already heard from Scholz, Biden, Macron, and Starmer. Meanwhile, the Chinese and Brazilians have timely drawn up a "peace initiative" that will give Moscow a few years of respite and time for rearmament.

We live in a dynamic world, and the sentiments of the "beneficiaries of peace" may shift; Biden could even promise Ukraine long-range missiles to shape some kind of reality. However, the key strategy already seems to be established: NATO is seeking a negotiation table, one that the bunker-dweller is willing to sit at. And it appears that this will be a Chinese table.

Source

About the author. Orest Sohar, journalist, Obozrevatel editor-in-chief.

The editorial board doesn't always share the opinions expressed by the blog authors.