As the conflict in Ukraine enters its third year, the path toward a lasting resolution remains deeply uncertain. New insights from historian adn political scientist Karlis Dauksts reveal a complex web of negotiations, geopolitical maneuvering, and shifting alliances that extend beyond the immediate battlefield. This report delves into the current state of peace talks, exploring the motivations of key players – including Russia, Ukraine, the United States, and China – and assessing the viability of potential pathways to de-escalation amid escalating tensions in Eastern Europe and beyond.
The trajectory of peace talks involving Ukraine remains unclear as the threat of wider conflict in Europe continues to escalate. A discussion with historian and political scientist Karlis Dauksts sheds light on the complex dynamics at play in high-stakes international negotiations.
The question of whether Russian President Vladimir Putin genuinely seeks peace has been a source of considerable debate.
Dauksts suggests there is no ambiguity on that front. He believes Putin is pursuing peace only on his own terms, arguing that he sees no alternative but to continue his stated objectives: “denazification,” demilitarization, and territorial gains. “Otherwise, he cannot explain his stay in power and the justification for his prolonged failures since 2022,” Dauksts said.
Maintaining international recognition of these “victories” is also crucial for Putin, he added, not just for domestic support but also to potentially shield himself from prosecution at the Hague.
Recent reporting in The Wall Street Journal, according to Dauksts, points to a broader struggle over resources – particularly oil and gas – extending beyond Ukraine to the Arctic region. The report indicates China is increasingly involved in these geopolitical considerations. News of a visit by Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to Moscow surfaced recently, though the extent of his involvement remains unclear. However, Dauksts noted that China has adopted a more conciliatory approach towards the European Union while simultaneously offering less overt support to Russia.
Putin, Dauksts believes, was surprised by China’s agreement to participate in a meeting aimed at bringing neutral forces into Ukraine. “Of course, there are various fakes circulating, so I cannot confirm this fact with 100% certainty,” he cautioned.
Notably, neither side is publicly commenting on the progress of the “peace talks.”
“Yes. We can only speculate about what is happening,” Dauksts said. He expressed skepticism about the qualifications of the individuals involved in the negotiations – Victor Vitkof and Avi Kushner – questioning their diplomatic experience. “Vitkof is a real estate speculator, and in the Russian criminal world, they call him a ‘bariga’ [a slang term for a fence, someone who deals in stolen goods],” he explained. “Kushner’s role is even more puzzling – perhaps he’s been assigned to Vitkof as a supervisor? Or perhaps he’s skilled at negotiating with the ‘kings of lies’ in the Kremlin?”
What about the 28 points that were reportedly presented to Volodymyr Zelenskyy?
Dauksts revealed that Vitkof drafted the 28-point plan alongside Dmitry, an associate of Putin. “Vitkof presented this text to Trump, stating that there was an American representative, a Russian representative, and a Ukrainian representative, we showed him the text, and he approved it, so the document could be safely signed,” he said. “Trump didn’t seem particularly interested.”
Is there a sense that Europe has become somewhat indifferent?
“Quite the opposite. It has gained a second wind,” Dauksts asserted. He explained that talks between Putin and Trump have effectively weakened the alliance between China and Russia. “China’s response: we must now talk to Europe. Therefore, I think the European Union could become an ally for China. We have already heard about Merc’s talks with China. And ultimately, what is Russia to China? A source of raw materials. But this source of raw materials cannot operate without the United States.” He added that Europe’s renewed focus on dialogue with China is a positive development, offering a strategic opportunity.
Could there have been discussions between Trump and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán?
“It’s entirely possible,” Dauksts responded. “Perhaps Trump indicated that Ukraine would be accepted into the EU. But that would mean Ukraine has abandoned its categorical demand to join NATO. What other points are there regarding defense issues? It’s no coincidence that Zaluzhnyi [Ukraine’s ambassador to the United Kingdom] has spoken about Ukraine needing to return to nuclear weapons.”
Dauksts also highlighted Putin’s increasingly bellicose rhetoric regarding potential conflict with Europe, describing it as a combination of arrogance and imperial ambitions. “The US president is not far behind his Moscow counterpart,” he added.
What would happen if Russia were to collapse, given its economy is geared towards war, facing food shortages, and industrial stagnation?
“Let’s not wish for something that won’t happen. Many are hoping for Russia to collapse. But the reality is that there are currently no forces capable of opposing Russia’s imperial ambitions, which are in Putin’s head,” Dauksts stated.
What about Donald Trump and his past claims of being able to stop the war “in three days”?
“He’s not indifferent. He was defeated by one thing – the Supreme Court’s decision that the people he appointed suddenly stood against him. Trump’s idea is to subordinate the judicial branch to his personal will. But Congress’s task is to prevent usurpation. There are rumors that an impeachment request is being prepared for Trump. Some say that such requests are water off a duck’s back for Trump and do not bother him at all. But others claim that it is significant because Trump fears that he will be deprived of funds and the ability to use the armed forces.”
He added that Venezuela is also a concern for Trump, with the potential overthrow of the Maduro regime seen as a significant achievement in the eyes of the world. “It would be a signal that America is returning to democracy.”
Trump claims that half of Europe is buying Russian oil. That seems to be true.
“I saw a report stating that Putin is ready to give up even Donetsk if the US lifts restrictions on the volume of his oil and gas supplies. He would quickly regain huge financial revenues. The economy would become less militarized and, over time, would be significantly strengthened.”
“We don’t know what direction things will take. But one piece of news seems dangerous to me: Russia has chosen its next test object to test NATO’s strength. And that is Latvia. Another unpleasant moment is whether Europe will follow the slogan of 1939, which was in British newspapers: ‘Are you ready to die for Danzig?’ In our case: ‘Are you ready to die for Ludza and Rēzekne?’”
But what about NATO’s Article 5?
“The northern direction – Sweden, Finland, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland – is forming something alternative to central Europe. Mercs has changed its position, and many German generals also claim that they will join this group. That is something serious. But let’s remember: the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962/63: the Cuban Missile Crisis protocols contained this phrase: the main idea of the US, England, and the entire Western world is human security. US generals claimed at the time that the Soviet Union could be destroyed in a few minutes. But what will we lose? – the president asked. Then we will lose New York and Los Angeles. Never! – said the president. Let’s go to peace, let’s agree with Khrushchev. And Putin today has understood that he can keep these fears of loss ‘alive’ between two great powers.”
“Will all the international brigades stationed with us be ready to defend us? And I fear whether we will also discover embezzlement of the military budget here – as in Ukraine? There are already reports of some laundered funds passing through Latvia. And many are only thinking about their personal benefit. However, I consider Zelenskyy to be a heroic man. How much more responsibility can he take on? At the same time, he does not want to leave his post. The constitution does not allow him to do so. Elections after the signing of a peace document? In 100 days? What elections, if about four million Ukrainians have left the country?”
