By John Q. Hosedrinker 
France and the U.K. plan to send a peacekeeping force to Ukraine, contingent upon a peace agreement with Russia. However, Russia’s continued aggression and refusal of a full ceasefire, coupled with shifting U.S. involvement, hinder progress. European leaders express concern that Russia is using negotiations to stall, potentially gaining concessions while continuing its attacks. The success of any peacekeeping force hinges on a unified European approach and a resolute stance from the U.S. against Russian demands.
Read the original article here
Europe’s ambitious Ukraine peacekeeping plans face a significant, perhaps insurmountable, obstacle: a profound lack of trust in Russia. The very foundation of any lasting peace hinges on the assumption that all parties involved will abide by agreements, and Russia’s track record severely undermines that premise. Past broken promises, such as the assurance that there would be no invasion of Ukraine in exchange for the relinquishment of Soviet nuclear weapons, cast a long shadow over any future negotiations. Putin’s blatant disregard for international norms and his openly stated ambition to rebuild the Soviet Union, even exceeding its former borders, further erode any possibility of genuine cooperation.
The current Russian leadership’s willingness to lie and break agreements to achieve its objectives renders any peace treaty incredibly fragile. A lasting peace in Ukraine seems impossible as long as Putin remains in power. His regime’s calculated actions demonstrate a clear disregard for international treaties and norms, leading to justifiable skepticism regarding any future commitments.
The concern extends beyond Putin himself. The question of who might succeed him looms large. The possibility of an even more unpredictable and ruthless leader taking the helm after Putin’s departure is a significant threat to regional stability. Removing Putin may not solve the problem; the inherent distrust of the Russian political system remains a substantial hurdle. The historical context is crucial here; a long history of authoritarian rule, including rigged elections, necessitates a thorough reassessment of the political landscape within Russia.
This distrust isn’t merely a Western perception. The sentiment, “You can’t trust Russians,” reflects a widespread feeling that goes beyond national borders. It highlights the deep-seated concern about the reliability of the Russian government. The lack of trust isn’t solely directed at Russia; skepticism also extends to other global powers. Historical precedent shows that even trusted actors can betray agreements, making it vital to focus on verifiable actions rather than verbal promises alone.
The very nature of Russian political processes raises additional concerns. The current system seemingly facilitates the rise of authoritarian leaders and lacks robust mechanisms to ensure accountability and prevent further escalations. A simple change in leadership might not alter this fundamental issue. The selection of a new leader through a rigged election or an internal power grab might simply replace one unpredictable leader with another. There is a risk of replacing one autocrat with a potentially even more aggressive and unpredictable successor. The potential for another power-hungry individual who might pursue even more ambitious – and dangerous – goals, is a legitimate fear.
The deep-rooted mistrust extends beyond the current leadership and includes structural issues within the Russian system itself. The absence of a truly democratic process makes it challenging to predict future behavior. Any assumption that a new leader will inherently be more moderate or trustworthy seems unfounded. The system appears designed to perpetuate power, regardless of the individuals involved.
Therefore, the focus should shift towards creating a stable and secure environment for Ukraine. A heavily militarized Ukraine, under the protection of a European peacekeeping force, might offer a more sustainable solution. This would act as a deterrent, creating a balance of power that could discourage further aggression. Such a strategy could provide the necessary security to initiate meaningful negotiations and secure a long-term peace agreement. However, even this scenario hinges on consistent support and cooperation from Europe, which will need to overcome internal doubts about the trustworthiness of other international actors as well. The road to peace is long, fraught with uncertainty and distrust.
Ultimately, the path forward requires a combination of strategic military deployment, diplomatic engagement, and a recognition of the structural issues within Russia that contribute to the current crisis. Overcoming the pervasive mistrust will require sustained effort, clear commitments, and a willingness to adapt to changing circumstances. A lasting solution demands a fundamental shift in the political landscape within Russia, which might require decades of patience, engagement, and a collective will for a more peaceful future. Simply changing leadership in Russia may not solve the problem—the system itself needs addressing.