Cairo: Hani Kamal El-Din
As international events escalate, Ukraine, led by President Volodymyr Zelensky, is striving to enhance military support from the West to compel Russia to engage in negotiations. However, global attention and resources are increasingly directed toward the Middle East, which is a significant concern for Ukraine.
Russia continues to threaten the use of its nuclear arsenal while fierce battles rage in Ukraine. Yet, it appears that the diplomatic center of gravity for the conflict has shifted to New York and Washington. Discussions at the United Nations and meetings between Zelensky, U.S. President Joe Biden, and Vice President Kamala Harris play a pivotal role in shaping the fate of the conflict. Nevertheless, these encounters are unlikely to result in significant breakthroughs that would bring Ukraine closer to the victory it seeks.
In his address to the United Nations General Assembly, Zelensky called on world leaders to support his country and push Russia toward peace with Ukraine. He proposed holding a new “Global Peace Summit,” emphasizing the need for Russia’s participation, given that the first forum held in Switzerland in June yielded minimal results.
Despite Zelensky’s efforts to advance his ten-point peace plan, Russia insists that Ukraine must recognize Crimea and four other regions as Russian territory, leaving both sides further apart than ever. Thus, the prospects for any meaningful negotiations seem virtually non-existent.
However, this has not deterred Zelensky from advocating among Ukraine’s allies for what he refers to as a “Victory Plan.” This plan involves swift and specific actions from strategic partners between now and the end of December. These “specific actions” likely entail expanded military support and permission to strike deep into Russian territory using Western long-range weapons.
Yet, this last point has already caused a rift among Western allies, with the U.S. expressing skepticism about its strategic viability. Putin’s repeated assertions that Russia would use nuclear weapons if Western missiles crossed its borders only exacerbate the uncertainty.
Even if Ukraine suddenly receives decisive Western support, it is unlikely to offset the other shortcomings facing Kyiv and its allies on the battlefield and beyond. Meanwhile, Russia is strengthening its alliances with Iran, North Korea, and China.
Moreover, Russia maintains a clear numerical advantage. Following Putin’s order to increase the Russian army’s combat forces by 180,000 troops, there is a growing sense that Russia intends to bolster its military presence further.
Simultaneously, relentless airstrikes on Ukrainian infrastructure have caused extensive and long-term damage, particularly to the energy system. This is expected to have a severe adverse impact on Ukraine’s civilian population and significantly undermine morale as winter approaches.
Shifting Diplomatic Priorities
However, as emphasized in this week’s UN discussions, there is also a growing diplomatic momentum behind the joint proposal from Brazil and China, first put forward in May. Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva promoted this plan during his speech at the UN General Assembly on September 24, alongside Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi.
Following previous proposals from China, Brazil, and other nations, the latest joint Brazil-China plan calls for a ceasefire along current front lines, followed by negotiations.
Ukraine justifiably fears that this could solidify the status quo and effectively amount to a relinquishment of territory now under Russian control. Furthermore, it does not guarantee fruitful negotiations but rather provides Russia with time and space to regroup and restore its armed forces for further escalation.
None of this is acceptable for Ukraine and its allies, as Zelensky clearly indicated in his UN address. Past attempts by China to promote a joint initiative with Brazil just before the June peace summit in Switzerland made little progress. Perhaps this time they may advance slightly further.
Yet, global attention and resources are now more focused on the Middle East and, to a lesser extent, on the civil war in Sudan. Consequently, the very fact that this plan is being revived may be enough for Russia and its allies to hinder the rest of the world from rallying around the Western-supported Ukrainian proposal to conduct a second global peace summit.
This is clearly alarming for Ukraine. Aiming directly at the Global South, Zelensky not only rejected the proposal from Beijing and Brasília but also stated that compelling Ukraine to make territorial concessions would be akin to reverting to the brutal colonial past of the Soviet era.
The stars are unlikely to align in favor of Ukraine following the UN General Assembly in New York. However, the internal political landscape in the U.S. ahead of the presidential elections in November is only marginally better.
Doubting that Donald Trump has a reliable plan for ending the conflict, Zelensky has become a target for fierce attacks from the Republican candidate, notorious for his volatility. At campaign rallies, Trump accuses Zelensky of refusing to negotiate and openly questions Ukraine’s ability to win. Moreover, a recent article by Robert Kennedy Jr. and Donald Trump Jr. in the influential political newspaper The Hill calls for pushing Ukraine to strike a deal with Russia to prevent nuclear escalation.
Trump’s rival in the presidential race, J.D. Vance, has made it clear that he opposes further military supplies to Ukraine. Therefore, it is evident that if the Republicans win in November, there is a very real prospect that Washington will cease to be Ukraine’s most crucial global ally.
All of this explains Zelensky’s urgency in seeking decisive Western support in the coming months and his calls for the international community to back his efforts to achieve a just peace in Ukraine. However, it also indicates that Russia and its allies have done enough to thwart any progress toward Ukrainian victory, whether on the battlefield or at the negotiation table.
