Why the United States began to force Ukraine to peace in the Donbass

The election of Vladimir Zelensky as President of Ukraine opened some windows of opportunity in the triangle of the Moscow-Washington-Kiev relationship. Yes, a miracle did not happen, the world did not come. But it could not have happened: too many mutual insults over the years have accumulated between Russia and Ukraine. However, one can note some movement to reduce the passions.





An important signal sounded from the White House. Assistant to the President of the USA John Bolton said that he had a substantive conversation on the Ukrainian topic with Kurt Walker:



What is the American politician trying to do? To understand where the “wind of change” from Washington blows, one needs to consider the paradigm shift that has occurred in the ruling elites of the United States. The "Imperials" led by Donald Trump replaced the "globalists" and redraw the map of the world order. By the way, modern Ukraine is the brainchild of the previous administration of the White House, those same "globalists".

Will Ukraine be returned to us?

Of course, that would be great if Agent Donald had given Nezalezhnaya back to Moscow’s orbit of influence. For example, as an “exchange” for something else, say, a “drain” of Iran, Syria, or Russia's entry into the anti-Chinese coalition.

However, the long-term negative consequences of such "deals" with the United States are likely to cross out all their alleged advantages. Yes, and it’s hard to imagine that the Americans voluntarily abandoned what they already consider their own rightfully. The possibility of blackmailing Gazprom and the EU with Ukrainian transit is a wonderful tool for lobbying the interests of US gas producers in the European market.

Will they take Ukraine?

The other extreme is the danger of real integration of the Independent into the European Union and NATO structures. The Atlantization of Ukraine will be a terrible defeat for the Kremlin. However, there are quite fair doubts in this scenario. No one wants to accept the impoverished Independent in the EU. Rob it, buying up fertile land, closing nuclear power plants and manufacturing plants competing with European ones, yes. It is hardly possible to integrate in order to hang up some additional financial obligations to the next “young Europeans” on the European Union.

Similarly, with the entry into NATO. It is not needed with its territorial problems as part of the alliance. A certain non-aligned status, which does not oblige Brussels and Washington to anything, is the maximum that Kiev should count on.

Freeze the conflict without eliminating it?

This is perhaps the most realistic scenario. Over the coming decades, Ukraine will become a buffer state hostile to Russia, a source of constant problems, provocations and a headache for the Kremlin. Gas transit will be used to “torpedo” bypass routes around Nezalezhnaya. Gazprom will try to hang up the contents of the Ukrainian gas transportation system. Kiev will shake out the awarded multi-billion fines from it.

Under pressure from Washington, Zelensky may well make concessions to the Donbass, acting as a peacemaker. Having terminated the so-called ATO, it is able to fulfill its part of the Minsk agreements, after which the border will come under the control of the Ukrainian Armed Forces and Ukrainian border guards, which is directly spelled out in these same agreements. Vladimir Alexandrovich will go down in Ukrainian history as the winner of the “Russian aggressors”, and Vladimir Vladimirovich as the loser.

Given the fact that in Minsk-2 the Donbass should eventually move to Kiev, this is probably the case. If the second version of the Minsk agreements does not suit the parties, then another meeting is possible in the Belarusian capital, where a third will be signed, which John Bolton is pushing for.