Russia’s war of attrition
Putin is talking peace, but he may still be stringing the West along. Emily Hohler reports
Having failed to seize a major Ukrainian city, Russia is “waging a war of attrition that has reduced some urban areas to rubble” and stoked fears that the conflict could escalate to nuclear or chemical warfare, says The Telegraph. US president Joe Biden has said that Putin’s “back is against the wall” and that his accusations that the US and Ukraine have biological and chemical weapons in the country are “false flags” and a “clear sign” that he is considering using both, says The Times.
The other possibility is that Russian forces switch from ground attack to “besieging, bombarding and starving the major cities” while preparing for a “renewed offensive”, says Richard Kemp in The Telegraph. There have been fresh efforts to block Ukrainian supplies and troops and although Ukrainian soldiers are successfully reclaiming ground in some parts of the country, the bombardment of Mariupol continues unabated. Capturing this port city is a “vital objective” for Putin as it completes “his land corridor” between Crimea and the Russian border.
Biden travels to Europe this week to discuss “further measures to support Ukraine and squeeze Russia’s economy with sanctions”, says Andres Schipani in the Financial Times. Meanwhile, Ukrainian president Volodymyr Zelensky has said that any potential “historic” settlements would have to be put to a referendum. Negotiators are exploring forms of “neutrality” for Ukraine, which would include renouncing ambitions for Nato membership. Any deal would also need to address Moscow’s calls for Ukraine to recognise Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the independence of two separatist-held statelets in Donbas.
We’re entering a time of “high peril”, says Julius Strauss in The Spectator. If Russia’s army is faltering, Putin will have to choose between “cutting a deal... he can sell at home” or escalating the conflict.
Any deal would “still leave him with a plunging economy” and “a semi-rebellious oligarchy”. There are rumours of a coup. Putin will be aware that a miscalculation could deprive him of his job, his liberty and “possibly his life”. This does not make an all-out nuclear war with the West probable, but the use of tactical nuclear weapons or even a “one-time strategic nuclear strike” remain possibilities.
Prepare for talks to fail
While Russia’s foreign minister Sergei Lavrov accuses the US of hindering peace talks, it is important to remember that the Russians failed to honour their side of the 2012 agreement to end the war in Syria, says William Hague in The Times. Now, as then, they may be “stringing us along”. It suits Putin to have talks in progress: they allow him to “look reasonable”, “soothe domestic public opinion” and give China an “excuse for not taking any peace initiative of its own”. In the “unlikely scenario” that Putin is in earnest, the issues are still “formidably difficult to resolve”. As the war continues, the list “only lengthens”. Will Russia give up Mariupol, if it takes it? Who pays for the damage in Ukraine? How are the lives lost and the ten million uprooted to be reflected in a peace deal?
The West must be ready for talks to fail and plan accordingly: imposing more sanctions, adapting to energy and commodity shortages, and providing greater support. It must also “continue to pressure China against stepping into the breach with finance and munitions”, says Kemp. The fact the rouble is recovering and financial conditions “easing” points to “loopholes, perhaps involving Chinese banks, that the West needs to close”, adds The Times. An embargo on Russian oil and any repercussions caused (Moscow limiting gas exports) is a price worth paying. Events in Syria “emboldened Putin by undermining the credibility of American threats”. Biden is “right to be wary of making the same mistake”, but the West needs to take firm action, sending a clear message that we will “only de-escalate when the very last Russian solider has left Ukrainian territory”.