‘Zelensky’s victory plan largely shifts responsibility to international partners”: Yevhen Magda
President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s peace plan has sparked a lively debate in society and among experts.
It attempts to offer a vision of Ukraine’s future victory in the war, but at the same time poses a number of challenges for the country. As Ukrainian citizens have long been waiting for concrete solutions and clear perspectives, this topic has not been ignored.
However, even after its publication, the plan raises more questions than answers.
However, it is important to understand that Zelenskyy’s peace plan covers both domestic issues and foreign policy, relying on partnerships with Western countries.
According to Yevhen Magda, Director of the Institute of World Policy, PhD in Political Science, author of the book ‘Hybrid Warfare’, the victory plan has its advantages and disadvantages.
Magda emphasises that after Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s speech in the Verkhovna Rada, the question immediately arises: why did it take so long to show this plan to the citizens of Ukraine? Obviously, Ukrainians deserve to see such an important document as soon as possible. Although the plan has a clear vision of the future, it largely shifts responsibility to international partners. However, it is worth remembering that Ukraine began its path to Euro-Atlantic integration back in 1997 by signing the Charter on a Distinctive Partnership with NATO.
According to Yevhen Magda, no one can blame the Ukrainian political establishment for not reacting more quickly before the autumn of 2022, when Russia held an illegal referendum on the accession of the occupied Ukrainian territories.It was then that Ukraine applied for NATO membership.However, even an invitation to join NATO is currently difficult to obtain, as this decision must be supported by consensus. Some countries, such as Hungary and Slovakia, are sceptical about this issue, and it is not easy to expect Joseph Biden to put political pressure on the allies in this situation.
“At the moment, it is quite difficult to receive an invitation, and I emphasise that it is only an invitation, to join NATO, because this decision must be made by consensus. We have at least two countries – Hungary and Slovakia, and I think there will be more – that are sceptical about this issue. And, accordingly, it is quite difficult to imagine that Joseph Biden will put political pressure on his partners in the current situation.
And I am somewhat confused by the thesis about the desire to deploy a comprehensive non-nuclear deterrent package on the territory of Ukraine. As far as I understand it, these are short- and medium-range missiles. If so, this implies the deployment of foreign military bases in Ukraine. This is currently prohibited by the Constitution. And it is impossible to change the Constitution under martial law. Developing economic potential and strengthening defence is all well and good. But when it comes to sharing intelligence, as I understand it, not all of our allies want to share this intelligence. This is their right, by and large,” Magda believes.
He believes that the issue of more active involvement of Western countries in the development of Ukrainian industry and mining is a really good idea, and it requires more detailed negotiations.
“As for taking a more active part in the development of Ukrainian mineral resources, and in the development of Ukrainian industry in general, this is a correct thesis, it is needed. And it requires, I think, the maximum expansion of negotiations. Because this is what our Western partners are most ready for, according to the survey of politicians.
As for the fact that our troops will be able to replace the US troops in Europe after the end of the Russian-Ukrainian war, well, I would say that given the incomparability of the US and Ukrainian military budgets and the fact that not all of our neighbours will like the presence of our million-strong defence forces, this is a task with an asterisk,’ sums up Yevhen Magda.
