The tragic unravelling of Ukrainian bravado as war realities set in – Firstpost

It’s not a good time to be the Ukrainian foreign minister. Ukraine has its back to the wall, it has already lost 20 percent of its territory to Russia, and Ukrainian troops have withdrawn from all but a sliver of land in Russia’s Kursk region, where it had made some gains in the hope of using it as a bargaining chip in negotiations.

Donald Trump famously told Volodymyr Zelenskyy at the White House that he has “no cards”, and well may the Ukrainian president put up a brave face and military analysts sympathetic to Ukraine portray otherwise, the situation looks increasingly grim.

Ukraine can’t get enough men at the frontlines, Russia is slowly making inroads, and Ukraine’s biggest benefactor has told them very simply that the war must end, for which Ukraine must make concessions. Ukraine may choose to ignore the Trump-led US, but without American funds, military support, intelligence and Starlink support from Trump ally Musk, they’d be sitting ducks before Russian forces, European hand-wringing notwithstanding.

So, when the Ukrainian foreign minister Andrii Sybiha sat down with Firstpost managing editor Palki Sharma for a conversation at Firstpost’s IdeasPod during the ongoing Raisina Dialogue, he understandably sounded defensive.

Ukraine has reluctantly ‘agreed’ to a “temporary ceasefire” and the minister kept repeating that his country wants “just, comprehensive, lasting peace” and demands a “response from Russian side for unconditional ceasefire.”

“Just, comprehensive, lasting peace” is the other way of saying that Ukraine won’t make any territorial concessions, but the trouble is, Ukraine is in no position to make any demands.

Putin, on the other hand, is. He has already clarified to the US, that is pushing the Russians to accept the ceasefire deal, that it sees the temporary pause as nothing but a chance for Ukraine to strengthen its ranks, and any ceasefire discussion must follow his terms and conditions, that include suspension of arms and military equipment to Ukraine, security guarantee for Russia, addressing broader territorial disputes to ensure ‘lasting peace’, neutral status for Ukraine, monitoring of ceasefire violations, and a formal decision to bar it from joining security alliances such as NATO.

That’s a difficult package of terms for Ukraine to swallow, and it wasn’t surprising to see Sybiha take a maximalist position when pushed on the issue.

He accused Russia of not wanting to recognise Ukraine as an independent state, and added, “Ukraine will never accept restriction on the military. There is no possibility of (anyone) restricting our choice to become a member of any union or any alliance. There will be no compromises of our territorial integrity and sovereignty. Ukraine will never recognise any part of territories occupied by Russians. These things are crucial and fundamental in our peace process.”

It is not clear, however, whether this maximalist position has any pragmatic basis. To a question on what leverage Ukraine has to make Russia accede to its demands, the foreign minister took recourse to rhetoric.

“I believe in our strength, our people, our soldiers. Our morale is strong. We need support of international community because it is about principles.”

It’s going to take something more tangible than just morale to turn the tide. At the time of writing, Trump is scheduled to speak to Putin over the phone later on Tuesday, and the fate of the ceasefire hinges on the ‘deal’ that both leaders make, regardless of Ukraine’s objections.

This is a staggering display of power play between two big actors and is indicative of the harsh geopolitical climate that lies ahead where Ukraine is more of a chess piece on the board than a player of any consequence.

It was interesting to see the Ukrainian foreign minister alternate between bravado and despair during the chat. He claimed that “Ukraine has prevailed” despite Russia being “26 times bigger than Ukraine and has nuclear capacity”, and stated that “we prevailed and managed to liberate 50 per cent of occupied territories. We managed to establish the grain corridor in the Black Sea and to restrict the capacities of the Russian Black Sea fleet. Our economy works and Russia has not occupied any strategic area.”

And yet, asked if Ukraine is at its weakest now, Sybiha admitted, “this war is not about Ukraine, but UN charter… territorial integrity. We need the support of international community and partners — diplomatic support, economical support, and humanitarian support – because it is in the interest of all countries to prevent the same development in other geographies.”

Though Trump has framed Ukraine as the responsible actors behind the conflict, and has sought to strike a deal behind its back with the Russians, Sybiha’s admission that Ukraine still needs American support and leadership betrays the desperation behind the bravado.

The Ukrainian foreign minister said that his country has “diplomatic tools” to make Russia comply, and claimed, “we believe diplomacy will work. Let’s give a chance to diplomacy”. Despite the maximalist positions in public, the occasional nervousness does slip by.

The Indian prime minister, Narendra Modi, has urged Zelenskyy to sit across the table with Putin to end the war. Ukraine should pay attention to his wise counsel.