It cannot be said that this all-round pressure is without effect. According to NV magazine (Ukraine), President Volodymyr Zelensky stated in Berlin that Ukraine could abandon its NATO membership ambitions in exchange for security guarantees equivalent to NATO’s Article 5.
Although this statement came as a surprise to Ukrainians, it didn’t provoke harsh criticism of the president. In fact, Zelensky’s domestic approval rating has risen by more than 10% in recent days. In November, 49% of Ukrainians said they trusted their president. The figure now stands at 61%.
Talk of a possible renunciation of Ukraine’s NATO membership ambition may sound appealing to Russian President Vladimir Putin and US President Donald Trump, but in reality, it could have very serious consequences for Ukraine over and above security concerns.
The point is that Ukraine’s aspiration to join NATO is enshrined in the country’s Constitution. Zelensky’s statement, therefore, implies the need to amend the Constitution.
This process would require a Constitutional Court ruling on the legality of the proposed amendments. At least 300 members of parliament – a “constitutional majority” – would also have to vote in favor of the amendments. A referendum would then be held, and only after a positive referendum result could the constitutional amendments become legislation.
However, the Constitution does not permit alterations to Ukraine’s territorial integrity, nor does it permit amendments to be made during martial law. Zelensky cannot, on behalf of Ukraine, abandon the course toward NATO membership.
Even if Zelensky’s advisers claim they have found a way to amend the Constitution during wartime, moves towards constitutional change would cause Ukraine’s political life to intensify, and the clammer could drown out the noise of military action in the south and east of the country. What is more, other political forces could hijack Zelensky’s initiative to amend the Constitution.
Many political figures have reasons to dislike the current Constitution and, if constitutional reform gets underway, we will hear calls for a variety of changes, like the removal from Article 10 of the reference to the protection of the Russian language. But perhaps, I am getting ahead of myself - without changes to the Constitution, the Constitution cannot be amended during wartime.
While Steve Vitkov and Jared Kushner are negotiating with Zelensky, unknown US politicians have been holding lengthy, parallel negotiations with Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko. The recent release of 123 political detainees from Belarusian prisons is clearly related to those talks – a showy, but mercifully positive side-effect, if not actually a result.
What does Belarus stand to gain?
For Lukashenko, the lifting of sanctions against Belaruskali, Belarus’s main export producer, is, so far, the key outcome of these clandestine negotiations.
We might expect the Kremlin to show signs of concern about a warming in Belarusian-US relations, but Putin has not yet activated his usual tool of influence on Belarus – a hike in gas and oil prices. This could indicate that Russia is itself behind the Belarusian-US negotiations?
Interestingly, information has recently emerged that Russia, too, wants to reward Belarus for something – and at the expense of Ukraine.
The Russian “governor” of the occupied territory of Kherson region, Volodymyr Saldo, recently announced “his willingness to hand over” part of the occupied Azov-Black Sea coast to Belarus. He was referring to the coastal areas between the city of Henichesk and the peninsula called the Arabat Spit.
According to Russian officials who control the occupied territory, this land will be transferred to Belarus for the development of a resort area with sanatoriums and hotel complexes.
For Lukashenko, such a prize from Russia could be very tempting. He would be able to tell his citizens that it was thanks to his wise policies that Belarus gained land, and not just land, but a coastal resort area.
The Kremlin could theoretically also benefit from its own “generosity.” Embroiled in the war, Russia lacks funds for social programs. Where could they find the money to rebuild the devastated occupied territories? Belarus could be presented as a foreign investor, despite the fact that the country is 100% controlled by Russia.
Helping all this along is the fact that the US has lifted its ban on Belarusian potash fertilizer exports which could bring Belarus huge profits, since global demand for potash remains very high. Where better to spend the earnings than in stolen territory, ransacked by Russia?!
There is just one detail of this apparent plan that still needs ironing out. Hundreds of Belarusian-owned potash railcars are currently stuck on Ukrainian territory – mostly near the border with Poland. They have been there since the start of the war.
The cargo wagons could not easily travel to Belarus via Poland because of the difference between the narrower European gauge and the wider Ukrainian one – a problem inherited by Ukraine from the Soviet Union.
It seems that this issue, like the question of changing the Constitution, is a conundrum that will be relatively easy to solve, but only after the war. What is more, the end of the war will be at least in sight when Russia re-amends its constitution to exclude illegally occupied Ukrainian territory.
The views expressed are the author’s and not necessarily of Kyiv Post.