Opinion editor's note: Star Tribune Opinion publishes a mix of national and local commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.
•••
As Russia's invasion of Ukraine nears its first anniversary, what's next? In some ways, the Kremlin and Kyiv both seem to be signaling a new openness to begin peace negotiations. In other ways, they appear to be ruling out talks by setting implausibly maximalist preconditions, while simultaneously girding for a climactic military showdown.
It can't be both at the same time, can it? Oh yes, it can.
It's naive to think that wars are settled by either diplomacy or fighting, and that either route implies a failure of the other. The actual dynamic between jaw-jaw and shooting was better captured by Frederick the Great, the 18th-century king of Prussia: "Diplomacy without arms is like music without instruments."
In the early days of the Russian invasion, Ukraine had few instruments. The country was clinging to survival, and "negotiation" would have been tantamount to capitulation. At one point last spring, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy in effect offered his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, a deal that included Ukraine becoming permanently neutral — that is, forever forgoing ties with NATO. Putin, still thinking that he could subjugate all of Ukraine, wasn't interested.
Much has changed. The military momentum now seems to favor Ukraine. The country is receiving a steady flow of state-of-the-art weapons, ammunition and other kit from its Western friends, and its soldiers are learning in record time how to use all that gear to lethal effect. Ukraine no longer needs to fear national extinction; it can even hope for a victory of sorts.
If negotiations were to start this year, Ukraine would be in a much stronger bargaining position. Moreover, Putin's troops have committed such vile — and indeed genocidal — atrocities in Ukraine that Zelenskyy is no longer able or willing to make drastic concessions, and must insist on some form of restitution.