Dazzling fog of diplomacy
And if the phrase "withdrawal of Russian troops" is replaced with "expulsion" in the text of Zelensky’s 10 points, will it still be a "peace formula" or an escalation?
And when did the countries participating in the conference in Saudi Arabia manage to break off diplomatic relations with Ukraine, whose statehood was recognised in late 1991 and early 1992?
And by breaking it off - at the conference - did they recognise its territorial integrity and state sovereignty again?
Is this the only way to reach a consensus to put respect for Ukraine's territorial integrity and sovereignty at the heart of the future peace negotiation process?
Has anyone other than the Russian aggressor ever demonstrated disrespect for the UN Charter and international law? Doesn't this need to be restored, rather than supplemented by procedures for punishing the aggressor and forcing it to restore order?
In general, was it a conference in Saudi Arabia and not in Normandy?
Or is Paris 2019 still ahead of us? With the difference that there will be more than 60 participants instead of four?
This is not a joke, because China itself majestically descended from its usual place on the bank of the river, along which the corpse of one of its few enemies was to float, to arrive on a reconnaissance mission at this conference...
Even China, which is accustomed to messing with foreign barbarians' heads with sophisticated Chinese diplomacy, lacked evidence of the real state of affairs, which forced it to participate in the event.
As for the lack of information, this is true. And not only China lacks it.
On the contrary, the "peace conference" in Jeddah, of course, was given special weight and even gloss by the sad news background of the lack of success of the Ukrainian Armed Forces at the front.
Therefore, not only representatives of the so-called global south, but also Europeans came to Jeddah to learn something, even if only to see the contours of events in the dense fog of war and its "coverage" and commentary.
Well, maybe it didn't apply to Mr Sullivan...
And in general, the American party "United Russia", that is, those in the United States who seem to fear the collapse of the Russian Federation due to the alleged uncontrolled spread of nuclear weapons.
It is clear that Ukrainians were watching and listening intently to the signals, or rather speculation, from Saudi Arabia.
While not so long ago, all Ukrainians considered the Armed Forces of Ukraine to be the only real diplomat of their country, in the face of a heavy offensive, which was constantly commented on by the Western media as unsuccessful, another Zelenskyy diplomat came to the fore.
Andriy Yermak, of course.
In fact, he is the only one who formulates the sentences that describe what has happened and what should happen in the process of establishing and shaping the peace formula and its implementation.
However, the head of Zelenskyy's OP is currently just an organiser of the process.
The methodology of forcing Ukraine to give up its sovereignty and territorial integrity was invented in 2014 by the participants in Normandy, Minsk and, eventually, the Steinmeier formula.
They came up with this word - "formula"...
But let us recall: the whole point of Steinmeier's formula was to legalise a foreign body in the body of Ukraine through elections whose fake quality was turned a blind eye by European relevant structures. And it was written there.
There was a word "in general" there: in general, compliance with the standards of democratic elections.
Now we have not heard the word "in general" yet.
And the word "elections" has already been used. However, not in Jeddah (perhaps simply because we haven't heard anything from there at all), but in Brussels.
And in the Verkhovna Rada, which has to find ways to comply with democratic standards in parallel with the war, because you cannot join the EU without it.
However, it is not only EU integration that requires elections during a war and occupation of a part of the territory.
Elections bring in new - different - political forces. Or not forces, but personalities.
Those who, for example, did not vote to recognise Russia as an aggressor, occupier and terrorist.
These reflect, in particular, the opinion of that part of Ukrainian society, currently 30% (according to a poll by Democratics), which is ready to end the war at any cost...
Also, the restoration and adjustment of the election mechanism in conditions of war, occupation, refugees, etc. is necessary in case of a referendum.
Do you remember how shortly before the full-scale invasion, the Verkhovna Rada passed a law on an all-Ukrainian refresher course?
The law also includes a procedure for voting on territorial changes, such as the approval of a law on the ratification of an international treaty signed by the president.
Mr Stefanchuk then laughed a lot at those who expressed fears about the possibility of a referendum on the reduction of Ukraine's territory.
Indeed, the law has special restrictions on this.
But given these restrictions on the reduction of Ukraine's territory, as well as the recognition of Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity in international treaties with the countries participating in this conference, Ukraine's territorial concessions cannot be discussed anywhere and at any time.
All the states that have already adopted a number of resolutions at the UN General Assembly against the aggression and crimes of the Russian Federation should simply vote in advance for the latest resolution stating that all attempts by the Kremlin to insist on legitimising the occupied territories will have no prospects.
Regardless of the pace of liberation of these territories by the Ukrainian Defence Forces.
Because the way it seems now, it is not Russia's aggression alone, but the slowness of the cautious defensive Atlantic Alliance to provide weapons that undermines the foundations of a rules-based world order.
If there is such an awareness, then to shorten the way for the Kremlin to realise its doom, any peace conference should confine itself to determining the quantity and quality of the final list of sanctions without any secrecy. Embargo. Blockades of ports and airports. Movement of goods, materials, weapons...
Instead, we are promised a Global Peace Summit with the participation of... yes, a racist federation.
She will be re-educated.
As one EU official put it about the difficulty or even impossibility of transferring seized Russian assets to Ukraine, "these procedures are not designed to punish, but to change behaviour"...
It turns out that diplomats around the world are going to change behaviour rather than punish the aggressor?
And the leadership of Ukraine?!
Will we be forced to rewrite the law? And then the Constitution, which contains a list of inalienable territories?
And this will be called "peace"?
And we will certainly hear the old mantra: a bad peace is better than a good war.
However, right now we have proof that a good war necessarily begins after and as a result of a bad peace.
In the dense fog of war and diplomacy, one not always used standard is barely visible. Negotiations with a terrorist are conducted - before and after his elimination.
Well, it's not so.
Irina Pogorelova, for Censor. NET
