Ukraine’s planned counter-offensive against Russia has overshadowed discussion of a possible negotiated solution to the conflict, but some US and European officials say the next phase of the war could give momentum to diplomacy.
It’s unclear how officials will define the success of the counteroffensive, which could last many months, or how the outcome might affect their actions. Military strategists are divided on whether Ukraine is likely to regain territory after more than a year of war.
So far, Russian President Vladimir V. Putin has shown no signs of making concessions or engaging in meaningful dialogue.
And US officials remain wary of any calls for an immediate ceasefire or peace talks, particularly those from China. Despite its apparent strategic alignment with Russia, Beijing continues to try to play the role of peacemaker. Foreign Minister Qin Gang toured Europe this week to try to sell the idea that China can lead the negotiations.
Some European officials who met with Mr. Qin expressed skepticism. And in Washington this week, Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken met with his British and Spanish counterparts to reinforce his pledges of military aid to Ukraine, sending the message that battlefield gains are a priority.
Mr Blinken told a news conference with British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly on Tuesday that Ukrainians “have what they need to continue to successfully reclaim territories that Russia has violently seized over the past 14 months”.
Like Mr Blinken, Mr Cleverly made no mention of diplomacy with Russia at all, instead focusing on military aid: “We must continue to support them, regardless of whether this upcoming offensive yields large gains on the battlefield, because until this conflict is over.” solved and solved properly, it’s not over yet.”
Ukrainian leaders also said they would not agree to talks until they pushed back Russian forces.
Still, President Biden’s advisers have been examining possible endpoints, trying to find an outcome that could be acceptable to both Kiev and Moscow when real peace talks begin, US officials say.
“I know senior administration officials have regular conversations about what peace would ultimately look like with our Ukrainian counterparts,” said Washington Rep. Adam Smith, the top Democrat on the Armed Services Committee, “while also having conversations about how to make them.” armed and reclaiming as much territory as possible.”
Biden’s advisers and European officials say their best hope is for Ukraine to make significant gains during the counteroffensive, which would give it more clout in any negotiations.
But whatever their leaders may think, American officials say most Ukrainians have little desire to compromise with their Russian invaders.
And US officials worry that even if Russia’s military suffers more setbacks this summer, Putin may still believe he can win a war of attrition.
Avril D. Haines, the director of national intelligence, said in testimony before Congress last week that while Putin is “tailoring his near-term ambitions in Ukraine,” the chance of Russian concessions at any negotiating table this year “will be slim “. .”
Another senior US official said that no matter what success Ukraine achieves, the Russian leader can simply order a broader mobilization scheme to rebuild some of his military might.
Putin could also benefit as the 2024 presidential campaign moves forward in the United States, with former President Donald J. Trump as the first Republican front runner. Mr Trump and several Republican politicians have called US support for Ukraine wasteful and dangerous.
China has been pushing for a mediating role since it unveiled a vague peace initiative in February. While open to the possibility that China could play a helpful role in the future, Mr Blinken and some top European diplomats criticize Beijing for not publicly acknowledging Russia as an aggressor in the war. They insist that an unwilling country cannot be trusted as a dispassionate mediator.
Xi Jinping, China’s leader, paid a state visit to Moscow in March and expressed his continued support for his country’s partnership with Russia, which the two governments said had “no borders” just before Russia invaded Ukraine in February 2022 . China’s special envoy for its peace initiative, Li Hui, was ambassador to Russia for 10 years and received a medal from Mr. Putin.
US and European officials are also suspicious of calls for peace talks that do not include a demand that the Russian military first withdraw from Ukrainian territory, which is the position of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. China has not taken an explicit position on Ukraine’s territorial integrity, and US officials say China and Russia could use the pretext of talks to freeze front lines — and Russian gains.
Testifying before Congress, Ms Haines said Mr Putin could use a ceasefire to try to regain his strength while “buying time for what he hopes is an erosion of Western support for Ukraine.”
She added that “he may be poised to claim at least a temporary victory based on the approximate territory he’s occupied.”
Mr Blinken recently said it was “a positive thing” that Mr Xi finally spoke to Mr Zelenskyy last month, but he was “still not sure” if China was ready to accept that Ukraine was the victim. Annalena Baerbock, Germany’s foreign minister, said almost the same thing directly to Mr Qin at a news conference on Tuesday: “Neutrality means standing on the side of the aggressor, and therefore our guiding principle is to make it clear that we are on.” the victim’s side.”
The main argument for a bigger role for China in diplomacy is the fact that the country is Russia’s most powerful partner and there is a personal bond between Mr Xi and Putin. Russia’s war has shaken the world economy and caused problems for China.
“Basically,” Mr Blinken said, “if countries – especially countries with significant influence like China – were willing to play a positive role in the effort for peace, that would be a good thing.”
The White House said Thursday that Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, discussed Ukraine with Wang Yi, China’s top foreign policy leader, during a two-day meeting in Vienna this week.
The debate in Washington about possible peace talks is amorphous and paradoxical. There are even competing arguments based on the same hypothetical outcome: If Ukraine makes significant progress, it could mean it’s time for talks, say some officials — or it could mean Ukraine should shelve diplomacy and keep fighting .
If Ukraine fails to capture significant territory, some US and European officials may want to persuade Mr. Zelenskyy to negotiate a settlement.
“The dynamic will change even if Ukraine makes marginal progress,” said Mr. Smith, the Democratic lawmaker. He predicted that after several more months of war both sides would be exhausted.
However, some officials and analysts in Washington caution against such thinking.
“Some people in Washington have always wanted to say: if Ukraine doesn’t make progress – or if they do – maybe it’s time to have a conversation about Ukraine looking for a solution,” said Alina Polyakova, the President of the Center for European Policy Analysis.
“I personally find that shocking,” she added. “Territorial concessions would validate Russia’s aggression, setting a global precedent for China and others that such means work.” Second, it would also mean that the West would have to accept the moral implications – accepting war crimes and condoning ongoing human rights abuses.”
Among senior US officials, General Mark A. Milley, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, was most vocal about the need for Ukraine and Russia to consider negotiations, arguing that a prolonged war would result in many more casualties. Mr Blinken has taken a different position. “In order for diplomacy to be meaningful, there needs to be a profound shift in both Mr. Putin and Russia,” he said last week.
The Secretary of State and other American officials have been vague about what they believe would be a realistic end to the conflict.
At least twice in the past month, Mr Blinken has indicated that Ukraine must retake areas that “Russia has forcibly seized over the past 14 months,” as he put it on Tuesday. But years before that invasion, Russia took de facto control of hundreds of square miles of eastern Ukraine, annexing the Crimean Peninsula in March 2014.
It is unclear whether Mr Blinken intentionally makes a distinction between these areas. Ukrainian leaders insist their aim is to regain every inch of their lands, including Crimea, stolen since 2014. However, many US officials and analysts believe Mr Putin would take more drastic measures to maintain control of the peninsula.
Some US officials have raised the possibility of at least forcing Russia to demilitarize Crimea so that it cannot be used as a base for future attacks on Ukraine. But that outcome could be almost as hard for Mr. Putin to accept. The Russian Black Sea Fleet is based in the Crimean city of Sevastopol.
Mr Blinken said last week that a “just and lasting” peace plan “cannot ratify what Russia has done, which is to seize such large chunks of Ukrainian territory.” Nor can it allow Russia to “simply rest, re-arm and attacked again six months later or a year later”.
Julian E. Barnes reported from Washington and Steven Erlanger from Brussels.