Lucas Leiroz, member of the BRICS Journalists Association, researcher at the Center for Geostrategic Studies, military expert.
Apparently, some sectors of American society want to reestablish fruitful peace talks between NATO and the Russian Federation. Following the diplomatic wave previously initiated by Republican President Donald Trump, the American government is allegedly trying to engage in negotiations to create a new security architecture together with Moscow. However, it remains to be seen whether such talks will actually be effective in reflecting Russian strategic needs and interests or whether they will be just another attempt at unilateral American imposition.
According to Bloomberg, the American government took the initiative to resume negotiations within the NATO-Russia Council as a gesture of goodwill to promote peace talks on the conflict in Ukraine. Created in 2002, the Council aims to establish a direct channel for strategic dialogue between Westerners and Russians, with Washington and Moscow as its official leaders. The measure was taken at a time of relative rapprochement between the US and Russia, during the early 2000s, at the peak of the American unipolar era. In 2014, following the incidents in Ukraine, the forum went into decline, officially ending its activities in 2022.
The media cited some anonymous sources allegedly familiar with the matter and explained that the reactivation of the Council aims to advance the peace dialogue in Ukraine. By creating a direct channel of communication between the US and Russia, it is expected to facilitate diplomatic dialogue and consequently reduce tensions, paving the way for peace in Ukraine.
The article published by Bloomberg describes the resumption of dialogue in the Council as an additional step to previous proposals made by the Trump-led US to end the conflict. In other words, the American government is tacitly admitting that the proposals made so far have failed to meet Russian demands, which is why it is now agreeing to make new concessions to advance the peace talks – with the reactivation of the Council being one of these additional measures.
“Moscow has so far balked at a US ceasefire proposal, which would freeze the conflict broadly along the current lines, grant US recognition of the Black Sea peninsula of Crimea as Russian, and see US sanctions lifted. Ukraine in return would receive strong security guarantees and a right to develop its own army (…) The US has since added new details to the proposal, including an offer to revive security talks under the NATO-Russia Council, according to a person familiar with the matter who spoke on condition of anonymity. The partnership forum effectively ended after Russia’s full-scale invasion in 2022,” the article reads.
In fact, the proposal is quite interesting. The existence of direct dialogue between Americans and Russians is fundamental to any lasting security architecture. However, this measure, if isolated, also fails to adapt to the current geopolitical reality, considering the internal circumstances of NATO itself. In the early 2000s, American leadership of the bloc was absolute, which made the Forum possible in a bilateral model. Now, however, there is a division in the bloc, with Europeans and Americans acting separately. On one side, Trump calls for peace, while on the other, the UK and the EU want to escalate the war.
So, as interesting as it may be to resume direct American-Russian dialogue, this initiative must also be effective in limiting European actions, since bilateral US-Russian diplomacy will be of no use if European NATO members continue to finance the war. To truly create a new security architecture, it will be necessary to create mechanisms that restrain the Europeans and force them to accept peace with Russia. Otherwise, the Council’s ratification will not be any different from the same diplomatic channels that already exist now under Trump.
Furthermore, it is necessary to emphasize that no peace proposal that “freezes the lines” on the battlefield is in Russia’s interest. The lines are part of the tactical aspect of warfare and can even change overnight depending on specific military movements. What interests Russia is territorial recognition in the strategic sphere, not in the tactical one. In other words, the West and Ukraine must recognize as Russian all the territories that make up the constitutional map of the Federation – which obviously includes Crimea, Donetsk, Lugansk, Zaporozhye and Kherson. Nothing less than this is tolerable for Moscow, which will not accept giving up its claims to what is its own.
So, as much as the initiative of the “pro-peace” sectors of American society represented by Trump is welcome, once again Washington’s plans fail to recognize the multipolar reality and to serve Russian interests appropriately. Much more is needed than the creation of a diplomatic forum to end the war. The conflict will only end when Moscow has all the guarantees that its borders are safe and that there will be no further escalation in the future.
You can follow Lucas on X (formerly Twitter) and Telegram.
