Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center, and Rajan Menon, director of the Grand Strategy Program at Defense Priorities, engage in a riveting debate on negotiating peace in Ukraine. They discuss the military and strategic dilemmas facing Ukraine, weighing continued military support against the need for negotiations. The conversation critiques the Biden administration's strategies and explores Ukraine's potential security landscape post-war. This clash of expert perspectives sheds light on the intricate geopolitical dynamics at play.
The podcast emphasizes the debate on whether the West should pressure Ukraine to negotiate, weighing the risks of prolonged conflict against territorial realities.
Contrasting perspectives highlight the importance of Ukraine's military strength in negotiations, asserting that favorable terms must come from a position of strength rather than pressure.
Deep dives
The Escalation of the Ukraine Conflict
The current war in Ukraine has escalated into one of the most significant foreign incursions into Russia since World War II, marked by intense military actions and territorial disputes. Russian forces have launched devastating retaliatory strikes on Ukrainian cities, while their advance in crucial regions like Donetsk threatens Ukraine's military supply lines. Instead of progressing towards a negotiated settlement, the situation appears increasingly unstable, fueling debates on whether Western allies should continue arming Ukraine or compel it to negotiate. This escalation raises critical questions about the future of both nations involved and the potential for resolving this conflict through diplomacy.
Arguments for Negotiation
Advocates for pressuring Ukraine to negotiate emphasize the reality that reclaiming all lost territories may be unattainable and that continuing armed resistance could further escalate the war. Emma Ashford argues that the West needs to facilitate discussions about potential settlements, suggesting that sustained military involvement has not led to the expected Ukrainian victories and could merely prolong the conflict. She points to historical instances where negotiations might have been more advantageous for Ukraine to consider, such as in 2022 after resisting early Russian advances. The idea is to reevaluate the approach towards Ukraine, balancing continued support with the harsh realities facing them on the battlefield.
Counterarguments Against Pressuring Ukraine
Contrasting views against negotiating now highlight the importance of Ukraine maintaining a position of strength before entering talks with Russia. Rajan Menon argues that pressuring Ukraine now could lead to unfavorable terms imposed by Russia, thus undermining Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. He insists that Ukraine has made significant military gains despite their smaller size, and more crucially, any negotiations should be based on mutual strength rather than with one side dictating terms. These perspectives stress that pushing for negotiations too soon could ultimately backfire, leaving Ukraine vulnerable to losing more territory.
Post-War Security Arrangements
The conversation turns to potential post-war security arrangements for Ukraine, including the feasibility of NATO membership, which is currently viewed as unlikely by both guests. They discuss alternatives such as European security guarantees or armed neutrality, which could allow Ukraine to maintain defense capabilities without fully aligning with NATO. Menon argues that the long-term security of Ukraine could be compromised if it solely relies on NATO membership for protection, as various member states have expressed reluctance in this regard. Ultimately, both speakers indicate the need for a pragmatic approach that considers the evolving geopolitical landscape while ensuring Ukraine's sovereignty and security.
Every day, experts from around the globe present their arguments for solving the world’s biggest problems. And every day, these experts disagree in small and large ways. At Foreign Policy, our approach is to share a wide range of opinions, side by side, day by day. But what if people could hear those arguments tested, in real time, under pressure from an opposing view–by an international cast of diplomats, journalists, academics and activists?
That’s the idea behind Counterpoint, a new debate show from Foreign Policy, in partnership with the Doha Forum—hosted by FP deputy editor Sasha Polakow-Suransky.
On this episode, Sasha explores the question: Should the West Pressure Ukraine to Negotiate an End to the War?
He’s joined by Emma Ashford, a senior fellow at the Stimson Center and an assistant professor at Georgetown University, and Rajan Menon, the director of the grand strategy program at Defense Priorities and a senior research scholar at Columbia University.