Both pro- and anti-Kremlin Russian political observers are taking the position that Moscow is being picked on unfairly by a hostile West and put the chances of an early peace in the Russo-Ukraine War close to zero.
Russian President Vladimir Putin rejected calls to implement a 30-day ceasefire as a precondition for peace talks with Ukraine, in a 1:50 a.m. statement to reporters in Moscow on Sunday. Instead, he suggested that Kyiv agree to hold talks in Istanbul on May 15 as a restart of the 2022 negotiations in Turkey. Putin read from a prepared statement and did not take questions.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky invited Putin to attend the meeting in person – an offer the Kremlin has not yet accepted.
Kremlin spokesman Dmitriy Peskov doubled down on Moscow’s position regarding Ukrainian and European insistence that Russia should first accept a 30-day ceasefire on Monday, saying “The language of ultimatums is unacceptable, it will not work. It is not possible to use such language with Russia.”
Views on the probability of the talks or the ceasefire going forward – never mind succeeding – were almost without exception pessimistic. The view was shared by political observers closely connected with Russia’s national leadership, independent political scientists and even by some political observers jailed by the Kremlin for voicing their opinions too loudly.
Political scientist Sergei Markov, one of the Russian government’s most senior West watchers, in a Monday analysis of the chances of a Thursday meeting between Putin and Zelensky was downbeat. The talks were they to happen would decide nothing and take place to satisfy Kyiv’s desire for positive media coverage, Markov said in his personal column, “Logika Markova,” on Tuesday.
“It is clear that Zelensky is not preparing for negotiations, but for a dirty show (media posturing) where he will be rude and provoke… If Trump participates in the negotiations, then Putin will participate… But Trump will have to take it upon himself that these will be (real) negotiations, and not a Zelensky media event,” Markov said.
A complicating factor and certainly a problem for Putin to travel quickly, and probably not considered by Washington is that, were both presidents to meet in person, then their security teams would be in close proximity to the leader of an enemy state, and would certainly consider possible ways of killing him, Markov said.
Maksim Zharov, a Russian political observer not usually considered a Kremlin insider, in a post on his blog Chisto Dlya Fiksatsii on Sunday said that Washington and Moscow were the big players, that Europe and Ukraine are satellites, and that there was little weight anywhere behind a peace process.
“The Kremlin, in the harshest manner possible for itself, rejected the ‘ultimatum’ from the ‘coalition of the willing’… the Kremlin is proposing that Trump order Zelensky to go to Istanbul to talk to the Kremlin about the ‘root causes’ of the conflict. And if Trump can’t (and he can’t)… then the Kremlin (will) ‘wash its hands.’ It [the Kremlin] is ready for both Trump’s withdrawal from the negotiations and a new escalation of the conflict.”
Russian political scientist Aleksei Zhivoff, a longtime advocate of a more aggressive Moscow foreign policy and sometimes Kremlin critic, in an article published on major media outlets on Monday said that the US is interested in its own gain while a united Europe is intent on confrontation, but that despite those differences Russia now faces a united West.
“I believe that Ukraine’s goal is to get time and a pretext to introduce foreign contingents into Ukrainian territory and unite this conglomerate into a new legal military bloc… The EU wants and is preparing to fight us [but] the US wants to make money in Ukraine and Russia, and war prevents this. This is the difference in the interests of the parties… despite strategic differences, our opponents have the same tactical interests [directed against Russia].”
Zhivoff said Russia should try to drive a wedge between the US and Europe, but that Russia’s leadership must acknowledge it is heavily outweighed by its Western adversaries.
Igor “Strelkov” Girkin, a former KGB officer and outspoken Putin critic, published a letter from his prison cell on Monday predicting the peace talks’ failure and, failing major reforms in Russian top leadership, potential national collapse.
“Contrary to general expectations, I, as usual, predict failure of any negotiations, simply based on ordinary logic, ordinary common sense.”
“Ukraine has now achieved unconditional support from Europe with the continued support of the United States. The flow of weapons, ammunition, mercenaries is constantly increasing… Our offensive has long been stalled and stopped, despite the losses suffered… I believe this proposal for a 30-day ceasefire is not a consequence of Trump’s pressure, but another tactical ploy, since it is very convenient for Ukraine to use the ceasefire to prepare for its offensive, for a new round of hostilities,” he said.
Girkin is currently serving a four-year prison sentence for “inciting extremism” by accusing senior Kremlin officials, including Putin, of incompetence and undermining Russia’s national interests. His Monday letter published on opposition information platforms predicted more fighting.
“We do not have normal negotiating positions that would allow us to defend Russia’s state sovereignty over the annexed territories, even those that are currently held by our troops. Therefore, only a fool or a saboteur, secretly assisting the enemy in the information sphere, can talk about the war ending soon and some kind of compromise peace. I think we have more than enough of both [in Russia]. I am not one of them, so I am sure that the war will continue until one of the sides wins completely,” Girkin said.
Russian politician Pavel Gubarev, an ultra-nationalist with a high profile in eastern Ukraine where he led separatist militia against government forces from 2014-21, in Telegram comments on Monday said that a ceasefire would formalize Russian failure to defeat Ukraine in more than three years of war at the cost of a million casualties. Even were a temporary halt to combat to be agreed to, he added, it would amount to a frozen conflict draining Russia of resources and isolating Russia from the rest of the world indefinitely.
In comments possibly treasonous under current Russian law, Gubarev said Russia’s only possible way out is “To continue the war only under the condition of radical personnel changes and mobilization of the economy and society for military needs. In addition, an internal enemy has already been formed inside Russia and continues to gain strength.”
Gubarev recommended Russia’s leaders repress non-Russian ethnicities to prevent enemies of Russia from attacking state institutions and undermining public morale, and that the national government intensify propaganda and threats of imprisonment to motivate Russian citizens to fight and win a long-term war against Ukraine and the West.