They have finally arrived, the very first F-16 fighters that Ukraine has long requested to confront Russian aggression. Still, only a handful, out of the 90 planned. President Volodymyr Zelensky made the announcement on Sunday, soberly. However, if these so-called marvels of American technology will change things in the long term by helping the Ukrainian army to curb Russian domination in the air, which is crucial on the military level, they will not reverse the dynamic on the ground in the immediate future. To do this, deliveries would have to accelerate considerably, and pilot training would have to follow, which will not happen by the American presidential election, on November 5, just as opposition to support for Ukraine is a nail on which Republicans are happily hammering home to their electorate.
After the failure of the Ukrainian counteroffensive last summer, the Russian army regained the initiative in October, albeit laboriously and at the cost of immense human losses, sometimes reaching a thousand deaths per day. In reality, it has so far only managed to gain a little ground in the Donbass, in eastern Ukraine, making minimal gains overall. The fact remains that the Ukrainians are on the defensive, still capable of resisting, but do not have the means to drive the Russians from their territory. The recruitment problem has become critical in Ukraine, a nation exhausted on all sides by two and a half years of war, while Vladimir Putin keeps reserves of cannon fodder at his disposal in cynical quantities.
It is in this context that, last week, in an interview with French media, Zelensky opened the door, in very cautious words, to the idea that territorial concessions are possible in the framework of diplomatic talks. His words were sibylline, we must not make him say what he did not say. His openness is like an interstice. However, they qualify his usual position of firmness, namely that there can be no question of negotiating with Moscow before the latter has withdrawn its army from all Ukrainian territories.
Zelensky reiterated his desire for Russia to be represented at a peace summit in November — something the Kremlin opposed with protests. no repeated in recent weeks — and called on China to pressure Moscow to open negotiations. Are you considering giving up territories? he was asked in an interview. “Ukraine will never give up its territories,” he replied. “The government has no official right to give up territories.” He added: “For this, it [faudrait] that the Ukrainians want it.” Understand: express it through a referendum consultation. But “it would not be the best option,” he continued, “because we are dealing with Putin and, for him, it would obviously be a victory, if he recovers part of our territories. […] That’s why this question is very, very difficult.”
Who is to say that this postmodern tsar that is Putin, a man whose ideology is based on an idea of a “Greater Russia” that denies democratic freedoms and the very existence of the Ukrainian nation, would agree to sign a peace agreement that is for him anything other than a ploy by which to later pursue his expansionist designs?
This is not the first time that Zelensky has mentioned a possible referendum or that he has played the card of the outstretched hand against Putin. It so happens that, in raising the referendum hypothesis, Zelensky is joining the proposal recently formulated by one of his main opponents, the mayor of kyiv, Vitali Klitschko. It then happens that he is distantly referring to possible compromises while the country is, on all levels, in an increasingly difficult situation. He is thus testing the ground of a public opinion that is still resilient, but out of breath.
On his blog, French specialist Guillaume Ancel noted at the end of July that Putin, by focusing on the Donbass, had clearly “renounced his initial ambition to subjugate Ukraine in its entirety” – for the simple reason that he no longer has the means to do so. He also points out that the F-16s are designed to be able to bypass most of the Russian anti-aircraft defenses deployed to protect Crimea, Moscow’s “Achilles heel,” which it annexed in 2014. The fact that Crimea, popular with Russian tourists, becomes vulnerable while the Russian army is marking time in the Donbass could lead Putin, according to Ancel’s analysis, to negotiate. Or not, since Mr. Putin’s desire to brandish the nuclear threat is a recurring one.
Against the backdrop of an American presidential election that could return Donald Trump to power — God protect us! — the Ukrainians, pawns of geostrategic calculations (like the Palestinians), can only hang on.