By EUvsDisinfo
Even before Putin ordered the full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, he professed that Russia only wanted peace, if only Ukraine and Western countries would give him the peace he wants. Towards the end of 2021, he made unrealistic and unreasonable security demands whose conditions, if fulfilled, would have made NATO allies feel profoundly insecure. Just a few days before Russia’s invasion, he sent a low-level official to present Ukraine with conditions for peace that it could not possibly meet. Since then, his negotiation proposals have insisted upon the ’denazification’ of Ukraine, an impossible demand since the Kremlin considers any Ukrainian who believes in Ukraine’s sovereignty to be a Nazi.
Defeat as goodwill gesture
Over time, pro-Russian commentators have re-written history to claim that then UK Prime Minister Boris Johnson somehow sabotaged a potential peace agreement in March 2022. In reality, emerging revelations about Russian atrocities in Bucha and elsewhere played a large role in stymying the talks, in which Russia essentially had presented Ukraine with a set of ultimatums. Putin himself resorted to portraying Russia’s humiliating withdrawal from northern Ukraine in April 2022 as a ‘goodwill gesture’. According to the Kremlin spin, any Russian retreat, it seems, is actually a proud step forward for peace.
President Trump: Russian friend or foe?
Pro-Kremlin outlets and commentators appeared deeply torn by whether a President Donald J.Trump would be a friend or a foe of Russia. Immediately following his electoral victory, many pro-Kremlin commentators hailed him as a potential godsend for Russia. One outlet, for example, announced, ‘With Trump’s victory, the chances of peace in Ukraine are greater than ever.’ A video commentator depicted Trump’s victory as a decisive blow to Ukraine. One Russian pundit even placed great weight on the idea that Trump’s special envoy to Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, said ‘I would like to set a goal on a personal level, professional level, I would say let’s set it at 100 days’ – and that this date roughly coincides with Victory Day celebration in Russia around 9 May.
However, not all pro-Kremlin takes were so jovial in tone. Another pro-Kremlin outlet asserted that President Trump would not be interested in compromises with Russia. Another one stated that President Trump’s desire to reduce hydrocarbon prices might hurt Russian military operations.
Finally, a few bitter-enders claimed that the US would be unfriendly to Russia, no matter who is in charge.
Russia: the mask is slipping
Finally, Russian state-controlled and other pro-Kremlin outlets have continued their habit of insisting that Western countries helping Ukraine to defend itself against Russian aggression and escalation are being aggressive and escalatory. Western countries are blamed for being unreasonable in their demands, escalatory in their measures, and ultimately uninterested in peace. Does this sound just like Moscow?
A typical piece alleged that Western countries are doing everything they can to prolong the war in Ukraine by aiding Kyiv with arms and other support. As always, any effort to help Ukraine’s defence was portrayed as a vicious attack on Russia. Another article accused EU leaders of being ‘radicals’ who want ‘a Crusade against Russia’.
Outlets typically depict Ukraine as merely an extension of Western spite for any peace. Often, articles claim that the country is delusional about its war prospects and in its unwillingness to negotiate on Russia’s maximalist terms. They often assert that Zelenskyy is prolonging the war only to avoid losing power. Outlets also like to proclaim that in any negotiations, Ukraine will have no choice but to cede significant territories. This works on the myth of Russian invincibility.
Rational Russia vs. insane Ukraine
As for Russia, Kremlin officials and pro-Kremlin commentators invariably present themselves as a rational and responsible foil for Ukraine’s alleged insanity, but with a recent twist. Many articles quote Russian senior officials who claim Moscow is open to talks. Sputnik Africa, for example, cited Lavrov supposedly reiterating Russia’s ‘readiness to negotiate without preconditions’. Lavrov then went through a long list of preconditions including Ukraine’s ‘denazification’, a slur about the country that Moscow made up.
Ominously, however, more than a few articles argue against negotiations. The idea is that Russia is winning and it should keep winning, peace be damned, unless a ‘negotiated’ peace would replicate rendering Ukraine defenceless against any future moves by Moscow against it.
Ceasefire as a ‘death trap’
For example, a Kremlin-affiliated commentator called any ceasefire agreement a ‘death trap for Russia’ and another said that ‘it is not beneficial for Russia to stop at the front line’. They are saying the quiet part out loud: that Russia’s main condition for peace is that it be indistinguishable from a near-total military victory.
The Kremlin would like nothing better, it seems, than to be alone in the destruction that it creates. Whether it gets there through a catastrophic war or a vindictive peace matters little.
As Tacitus wrote, supposedly quoting the Caledonian warrior Calgacus about the ancient Romans: ‘To robbery, slaughter, plunder, they give the lying name of empire; they make a solitude and call it peace.’
By EUvsDisinfo
