Brokers

After China’s earlier attempt to broker peace between Russia and Ukraine turned out to be a complete dud, it was the turn of African leaders to travel to both Kiev and Moscow to try and get negotiations started. The expectation for any headway to be gained was as low as it could possibly be.

China’s effort to broker a peace deal was seriously handicapped. Beijing is seen as Moscow’s closest ally. The formula offered by Beijing basically called for the forces to remain in place, basically legitimizing Putin’s land grab. On these terms, there was no way Beijing could possibly get Kiev to sit down with the invader and talk peace.

The African delegation that traveled to Kiev and then Moscow late last week was organized by South African president Cyril Ramaphosa. It included leaders from seven African nations, evenly distributed among those supportive of Russia, those that abstained during the UN General Assembly votes condemning Russia’s invasion and two perceived to be leaning towards the West. South Africa is seen closest to Moscow.

The African delegation justified their mission as an effort to limit the damage on their food situation caused by the war. The continent depends on Ukrainian grain supplies and Russian fertilizers.

One possible purpose of this mission was to provide an opportunity for both Kiev and Moscow to at least signal willingness to sit down and talk. That failed.

In Kiev, President Zelensky bluntly told the delegation that Ukraine will not begin peace talks until the last Russia soldier leaves Ukrainian soil. That is about as blunt as it could be.

The African delegation arrived in the Ukrainian capital at a rather inconvenient time. The much-vaunted Ukrainian counter-offensive had hardly begun. Kiev tried to sound confident they could militarily expel the Russians and recover all their occupied territory.

From Kiev, the delegation traveled to Moscow to meet with Putin. The outcome of that meeting was even harsher.

Throughout the meeting, Putin kept interrupting the African leaders as they tried to outline their concerns. This was clearly a group that could not impress the Russian strongman.

To make matters worse, Putin announced during his meeting with the Africans that he is not interested in continuing the UN-brokered agreement to allow Ukrainian grain to be shipped out of its remaining Black Sea ports and delivered to several countries, especially those in Africa. Recall that among the main concerns of the African leaders was the impact of the war on grain supplied to their countries. It was as if Putin was trying to spite the Africans.

Needless to say, the African delegation left Moscow empty-handed. Neither Zelensky nor Putin showed inclination to negotiate an end to the hostilities.

To add insult to injury, Putin announced, while the delegation was in Moscow, that he was delivering tactical nuclear weapons to Belarus. The pro-Moscow Belarusian president made the same announcement days ahead.

These “tactical” nuclear weapons are not small toys designed to take out a tank formation. The smallest “tactical” nuclear weapon has at least three times the explosive power of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.

There is no other motive for the delivery of these weapons but to scare the Europeans, possibly to break the consensus of the NATO countries. In the most difficult moments for his invading army in Ukraine, Putin consistently waved the nuclear saber, threatening escalation of the war.

Right now, we see in Russian-occupied parts of Ukraine the spectacle of an invading army dug in complex defensive positions. This suggests that Moscow has decided that the only realistic goal left was to annex parts of Ukraine its army had occupied. This was the core of the Chinese peace framework offered to Kiev.

Because of Moscow’s disposition, the NATO countries appear convinced the only way forward in Ukraine was to expel the Russian troops through effective ground action. The NATO countries committed to support Ukraine whatever it takes. Giving in to Putin’s land grab today will only encourage him to annex other territories on the fringes of Russia.

With the delivery of modern NATO war material, Ukraine is now trying to push back the entrenched Russian occupiers. The counter-offensive will take time, maybe years. But the Western powers are convinced there is no other way, not with Putin in power.

Military strategists believe the best the counter-offensive could do this year is to cut the land bridge from Russia to occupied Crimea. This runs through southern Ukraine. Since that strategic goal is so obvious, the Russians have spent the past year fortifying their positions.

It is believed the Russians blew up the strategic Kakhovka dam to hamper Ukraine’s counter-offensive. The destruction of this dam caused an environmental catastrophe in southern Ukraine that will likely need decades to repair.

Ukraine’s counter-offensive will not likely feature massing armor in one place, moving against a single target. That would make the Ukrainian armed forces vulnerable to air attacks, considering Russia enjoys air superiority.

It is likely the goal of the counter-offensive is to grind down Russian forces over a wide front, possible forcing large units to break and run. We will see that over the next few weeks, possibly until the end of autumn.

The intensity with which this conflict is being fought is taxing the ability of the major industrial economies to resupply their armaments. With her vastly smaller industrial base, this war should be taxing Russia’s economy even more.

But the fighting will not cease until a major military victory is scored.