"All this is completely unacceptable for Ukraine", says German diplomat Christoph Heusgen about the US plan to end the war. "If Zelensky agrees, giving up territory would be suicide."
According to an increasing number of media outlets, the US, with the participation of Russia, has developed a peace plan to end the war against Ukraine. There has been no official confirmation yet. However, some of the 28 points contained in it are already being actively discussed - for example, the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Donbass, including from territories still under Kiev's control. Some observers consider this to be a capitulation of Ukraine. What do you think about this?
Christoph Heusgen: I am not surprised that they talked. Steve Witkoff and Kirill Dmitriev know each other, have communicated before and are to some extent kindred spirits. It should be known that Witkoff also comes from a Russian family, and here in Germany we would define him as a Russlandversteher (in German, this is the name given to people who understand Russia’s position – ed.). If we listen to the information that is currently leaking out, all of this is completely unacceptable for Ukraine. This cannot become the basis for the peace that we all hope for in the near future.
Let’s look at the individual points. The first is that Ukraine must completely withdraw from Donbas. There is a proposal that Russia should actually rent it. This means that according to international law it will be part of Ukraine. Is such an option possible?
Christoph Heusgen: I believe that it is politically completely unacceptable for Ukraine to withdraw from territories that are not occupied by Russia. As for the second part - Donbass being leased or something like that - this can be discussed after the ceasefire regime comes into force, when further actions with respect to these territories will be considered. It is extremely important, and this must be reflected in the lease agreement, that Ukraine does not formally renounce its sovereignty or territorial integrity, and that Donbass remains part of Ukraine. I consider this very important. However, giving up territory, if the President of Ukraine agrees, would be suicide.
Another point that is being discussed a lot is that the Ukrainian army should be reduced by half and that certain types of weapons - we do not know which ones exactly, but probably the most powerful - will no longer be supplied by the West. What do you think about this?
Christoph Heusgen: This is also completely unacceptable, as it will ultimately turn Ukraine into a pawn in the hands of Russia. If the President of the Russian Federation Vladimir Putin or his successor ever decides to attack Ukraine again, this will become possible. The result of the peace agreement should be exactly the opposite: either Ukraine becomes a member of NATO, which I do not consider realistic at the moment, or, on the contrary, it will end up in a situation where any Russian leader will think twice before attacking Ukraine again, since it will be well armed and able to defend itself, preventing a new invasion.
Another issue that is being discussed is the Russian language. It seems that the new plan talks about raising the status of the Russian language to official, but this is not entirely clear yet. It is also assumed that the Russian Orthodox Church in Ukraine will also receive the rights it once had. What do you think about these proposals?
Christoph Heusgen: As for languages, I believe that in the long term we should establish principles everywhere, as is done in the Council of Europe or elsewhere, so that minority languages have a certain status. This exists in the European Union; in Germany there are Sorbs, and in Schleswig-Holstein minorities have rights and opportunities with regard to the Danish language. This should be discussed. As for freedom of religion, this is a matter for every religion and we should see how it can be resolved. The problem of the Russian Orthodox Church is that it is a state church. We see that Patriarch Kirill is very close to President Putin. So there is also a political aspect to this issue. The church in Russia is not independent and this should not be forgotten.
How should the European Union react to this plan? So far we have seen a restrained, skeptical reaction from Brussels.
Christoph Heusgen: I would react calmly. A lot is happening and new information is still leaking out. I think we just have to continue to insist as a mantra that the negotiations on Ukraine should be conducted only with Ukraine itself. I participated in the Minsk negotiations in 2015. Every point of the Minsk agreements was discussed with the then President of Ukraine, Petro Poroshenko. He was there, and now Ukraine must be included in these negotiations. This cannot happen without the participation of the country that makes incredible sacrifices every day for its own freedom and, ultimately, the freedom and security of Europe.
The new peace plan has emerged at a time when Ukraine is experiencing one of the biggest corruption scandals in its recent history. On the other hand, in the course of the war, Ukrainian troops are under enormous pressure in the eastern part of the country - in Donbass, Pokrovsk and elsewhere. How weakened is Ukraine at the moment and can this lead to it actually being forced to at least start negotiations?
Christoph Heusgen: These are two completely different things. One is the domestic political situation in Ukraine. I have been watching this with concern for some time. Even as chairman of the Munich Security Conference (MSC), I criticized the fact that President Zelensky, for example, did not allow his predecessor, President Poroshenko, to participate in the MSC. In other words, there is a tendency towards extremely authoritarian rule in Ukraine. In my opinion, such a role is played by the group around the head of the administration, Mr. Ermak. I believe that Ukraine urgently needs to unite its political ranks - it is no coincidence that there is a proposal to create a government of national unity.
On the other hand, it is true that the president is weakened. But his position of clarity, strength and steadfastness is the position of all of Ukraine. And despite all the suffering that the Ukrainian people are experiencing daily and the constant attacks from Russia, I still have the feeling that the Ukrainians are supporting and doing everything in their power to defend their country. They know what will happen if Russia seizes new territories. Therefore, I believe that despite all the fatigue, their readiness for defense will be maintained. This means that Ukraine as such has not been weakened. President Zelensky should consider how to respond to the accusations, which are now also being confirmed.
Zelensky himself confirmed that he is ready for negotiations. The fact that he was in Turkey may mean that Ukraine is also trying to resume negotiations with Russia, which have so far been fruitless. How do you assess the current situation? Have the chances of negotiations or perhaps even a ceasefire increased?
Christoph Heusgen: I think it is absolutely right that the Ukrainian side is constantly emphasizing its readiness for negotiations. You remember that President Zelensky went to Istanbul for negotiations. However, Putin did not go because he was not ready for negotiations. Unfortunately, I fear that negotiations can only take place when Vladimir Putin realizes that he will not be able to achieve his military goals, namely, neutralizing Ukraine, conquering the territories of four regions and creating a puppet government.
It is clear that the economic situation in Russia is deteriorating inexorably, and domestic support for the war is gradually weakening. Only then will real negotiations begin. Therefore, we must continue to support Ukraine militarily and politically. From a position of relative strength, negotiations can begin - I hope, as soon as possible. But these negotiations must have a realistic basis. What is now evident from the agreements between these businessmen - they are both such, including Dmitriev, who previously worked at McKinsey and Goldman Sachs - cannot be a basis for negotiations.