Vladimir Ogryzko: For negotiations with Russia to begin, it must first lose Crimea.
In an interview with RBC-Ukraine, Ukrainian diplomat and former Foreign Minister Volodymyr Ogryzko discussed how to persuade Donald Trump to act in favor of Ukraine, the reasons behind Joe Biden's inertia regarding the Ukrainian issue, the "warm bath" of Western politicians, and the fear of Russia's defeat.
CONTENTS
Donald Trump's victory in the U.S. presidential election is undoubtedly the number one topic on the global agenda. News from the U.S. is being followed closely in Ukraine. And although Trump has yet to provide any specifics regarding his elusive "peace plan," the overall sentiment is rather concerning.
However, experienced diplomat Volodymyr Ogryzko insists there is no reason to panic. If Trump truly attempts to "make America great again," he will not simply bow to Putin.
Ogryzko has also sharply criticized the policies of the current White House administration, particularly the lack of a strong response to Russia's violations of the world order and the eagerness to "appease" aggressors at any cost. This approach does not work with Moscow – in his conversation with RBC-Ukraine, Ogryzko, who has firsthand experience negotiating with Russians from a decade and a half ago and now leads the Center for Russian Studies, explains their diplomatic strategies. He asserts that achieving anything from the Russians requires identifying their pain points and systematically applying pressure on them.
For the full interview, visit the RBC-Ukraine YouTube channel; below are the key points in a condensed format.
About Donald Trump
“I don't think we need to follow the principle of 'all is lost.' That's the simplest option, but it seems to me the most incorrect one.
Ultimately, no one said, and Trump never claimed, that he would be at the Kremlin's beck and call. What does Trump want? He wants to make America great again, right? But how can you make America great by becoming a second-tier player in world politics? And obeying whom? To Putin, a war criminal who has violated all norms of international law, economically has nothing to offer, and is a vassal of China?” – Ogryzko states.
He believes that the current Ukrainian authorities must develop a clear project outlining what Ukraine can offer the U.S.
“Trump is a businessman. Trump has always been in business. What does a businessman in politics mean? It means a person who wants to achieve results. Let’s look at Ukrainian-American relations from the perspective of what Trump can profit from.
He once said before the elections about Zelensky that Zelensky is the person who comes to America, takes 60 billion, and goes home. In reality, out of those 60 billion, 50 stays in America. That's American weapons produced in America. One Patriot system costs 1.2 billion dollars. We need at least 20 of those Patriots for everything to function properly. And what about Europe? Europe needs not 20, but 220 – I’m speaking conditionally. That’s hundreds of billions of dollars.
Wouldn't businessman Trump refuse an offer that suggests loading his economy with orders for the next 5 to 7 years?" – the diplomat reasons.
Furthermore, Ogryzko emphasizes that the future U.S. president needs to be thoroughly informed about what exactly his country will lose if Ukraine loses: “[Trump] will simply sit down and calmly think, well, if I help Putin, he will now capture 20% of Ukraine, and then he will go further. What do I gain from this? Only problems. If I help Ukraine withstand and defeat Putin, I will benefit from that. Both politically and economically. So, what conclusion will Trump draw?”
Regarding the scenario where Trump cannot be convinced to assist Ukraine, Ogryzko suggests not to dwell on it for now. After all, the Washington summit decided that next year Ukraine should receive 40 billion dollars in military aid. The European Union and the G7 countries have agreed to allocate an additional 50 billion in aid for financial and economic needs to our country by 2025. This time should be used to convince Trump to extend assistance to Ukraine.
About Joe Biden
Ogryzko describes the position of the Biden administration and the current U.S. president regarding the war in Ukraine as “political impotence.” This weakness and indecisiveness of the Democrats have persisted since Barack Obama's presidency. Any pretext, such as Hurricane Milton, which caused the “Ramstein” meeting with Biden to be canceled, is used by the current U.S. president to avoid making decisions.
“The world must be peaceful, quiet, and calm, where escalation is unnecessary, and where one can even retreat if needed. Because the opponent may have made a mistake; we should give him a chance to reconsider and return to the right democratic values. You see, this is to some extent a mental illness. Because when there is no reaction to evil, evil becomes an even greater evil.
In this understanding, in this pseudo-liberal view, evil must be called to order, to reason, so that it returns to normal living conditions. They don’t want to understand that evil must be forced to retreat; otherwise, it will continue to advance. This is all a continuation of the ideology of appeasement. Not punishment for a crime, but appeasement. And here we have the results,” – Ogryzko comments.
On the other hand, he states, before the inauguration of the new president, Joe Biden still has a chance to take decisive actions that could truly alter the balance of power in the Russian-Ukrainian war.
“If Biden tries to claim leadership in this final stretch of his political career, he could take many beneficial steps for Ukraine. He has nothing to lose; in two months, he will enter history, and that will be the end of his political career. So, he should do something to be remembered as a person capable of decisive steps.
Now they found an option: we will spend all 6 billion dollars that still need to be paid to Ukraine. Such fantastic decisiveness, that’s super. But something else could have been done; they could have allowed striking deep Russian targets, they could have provided much more weapons for this purpose. Because you can authorize it, but if there’s nothing to use, the authorization hangs in the air,” – the interlocutor notes.
As for an invitation to NATO, it currently seems extremely unlikely, Ogryzko says.
“A conditional Orban might appear and say, ‘I, Baba Yaga, am against it.’ There’s no time to persuade Orban anymore. Moreover, he knows that in two months, Trump will be there, who might support him. So, the question shifts to the theoretical realm. If Kamala Harris had won, such an option might have been possible. Now, in my opinion, its chances are minimal. Although Orban might still step out for a coffee when some decisions are being made. That option is also not excluded. Here, the question is about political will and decisiveness. And if there is no will, then we return to the notion of political impotence,” – the diplomat believes.
About negotiations with Russia
As a former Foreign Minister, Volodymyr Ogryzko has experience negotiating with the Kremlin. In particular, he participated in negotiations with Russia during the so-called second gas war when the Russians cut off gas to Ukraine on January 1, 2009. A week later, they also halted gas supply to EU countries, supposedly because Ukraine was stealing the blue fuel meant for transit to Europeans.
"If Martians were sitting across from me, I would negotiate with them more easily than with the Russians. Because they are a truly astonishing people," – he remarks.
So far, the ex-minister sees no chances of bringing the Kremlin to the negotiating table.
“For starters, Russia needs to lose Crimea. By the way, many Western military strategists have long been advising our military to begin with Crimea. Crimea must be taken from Russia. For Russia, for Putin personally, this is something sacred. He leads all his history from there; he claims his legacy from there. I don’t know, maybe he even considers himself a descendant of Roman emperors. The next time we hear something from him, he must move forward.
If Crimea falls for him, his image as a victor will collapse, and he is a macho, a man who must win everywhere,” – Ogryzko asserts.
To understand how Russians behave in negotiations, it is enough to look at the behavior and statements of the Russian Foreign Ministry's press secretary, Maria Zakharova: “She allows herself to address Macron informally in her Telegram channel, to lecture Scholz, and to call him by some derogatory terms.