MISTY BÜRGENSTOCK

On June 15-16, 2024, the world's attention turned to the Swiss resort town of Bürgenstock. The first summit on the settlement of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict and ending the war took place here. The main aim was to establish an international platform for negotiations between Kiev and Moscow in the near future. However, the outcome of the summit does not definitively indicate the possibility of achieving this goal.

What does the communiqué reveal?

The gathering, known as the "peace summit," was attended by representatives from over 90 countries and 8 international organizations. Roughly half of the participants represented Western nations in solidarity with Ukraine, while the other half comprised countries from the "Global South." The absence of Russia at the summit prevented a larger number of participants, with China declining to attend in response to Russia's exclusion. Several key participants expressed the view that Russia's presence could have positively influenced the summit's outcome. For instance, Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan suggested that the summit could have been more "result-oriented" with Russia's participation.

Despite Russia's absence, which aligned with Ukraine's initiative to promote its "peace formula" internationally, other forum organizers, including Switzerland as the host, emphasized focusing on three core issues related to resolving the Russian-Ukrainian conflict. These issues – nuclear security, food security, and humanitarian aspects – with relatively stable global consensus, are outlined in the final communiqué.

The document urges Moscow to transfer control of the Zaporozhye nuclear power plant to Kiev and repatriate thousands of Ukrainian children. It also emphasizes the inadmissibility of nuclear weapons' threat or use, ensuring free and safe trade navigation, and access to Black Sea and Sea of Azov ports. A significant paragraph highlights that peace in Ukraine will be based on the UN Charter, respecting territorial integrity and sovereignty.

Observers credited Kiev's diplomacy for securing support from representatives of 78 countries for Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity. However, influential countries from the Global South such as India, Brazil, Mexico, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, Indonesia, and others declined to sign. Iraq, Jordan, and Rwanda later withdrew their signatures.

The disagreement of the Global South is articulated in a statement from the Indian Foreign Ministry, emphasizing that resolving the Russian-Ukrainian conflict necessitates "real and practical interaction" between the parties involved. Once again, Russia's absence is highlighted in this context.

It's unsurprising that Moscow, displeased with its exclusion from Bürgenstock, was somewhat pleased with what it perceived as minimal results from the summit. This raises questions about whether the inaugural "peace summit" can significantly impact an early ceasefire and peace between Ukraine and Russia.

Will the "plant" grow?

The Bürgenstock meeting reaffirmed Ukraine's commitment to achieving peace based on restoring its integrity and withdrawing Russian troops from recognized Ukrainian territories. Kiev enjoys support from a majority of UN member States in this endeavour. However, for many countries worldwide, particularly those in the Global South, the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is not a top priority. Unlike the West, they don't view Russia as a hostile entity. The disagreement over Russia's absence at the meeting underscored this sentiment. While some countries from the South attended Bürgenstock without intent for confrontation with the West – who spearheaded the "peace summit" – it doesn't imply an anti-Russian stance in their policies.

The Bürgenstock assembly isn't viewed as a stand-alone event by its initiators. Ukraine has openly expressed plans to host a second "peace summit" before year-end, possibly in a Southern country like Saudi Arabia. Russia might receive an invitation for this event. According to Vladimir Zelensky, Kiev anticipates that progress towards a second peace summit will lead to ending the war and establishing a just and lasting peace. This entails exerting maximum international pressure on Russia to accept a settlement based on restoring Ukraine's territorial integrity.

How feasible is such a scenario? Can Russia's involvement in the "peace summits" be guaranteed if conditions are stipulated that directly contradict its military and political aims?

Ahead of the Bürgenstock forum, Russian President Vladimir Putin laid out his terms for ending the conflict in Ukraine. These terms include Kiev renouncing NATO membership aspirations and acknowledging territories in Ukraine occupied by Russian forces as Russian territory. Ukraine rejected these terms as akin to surrender. The United States echoed this sentiment.

US State Department spokesperson Matthew Miller criticized Putin's demands as "another extreme statement requiring Ukraine to cede even more sovereign land than currently occupied by Russia before negotiations can start." He emphasized that such terms are not a reasonable basis for peace as they violate the UN Charter, morality, and common sense.

Moscow appears to be pushing for the West to pressure Ukraine into concessions, considering the futility of expecting a change in its stance. This strategy becomes more evident in light of China's increased cooperation with Russia in response to Western calls to cease technological and military support to Russia. Despite Ukrainian President Zelensky's criticism of China's absence at Bürgenstock, he emphasized that China is not Ukraine's enemy and urged it to play a constructive role in peace efforts.

Will Beijing's anticipated pressure on Moscow materialize? Western capitals harbour no illusions about this.

Overall, the outcome of the Bürgenstock summit leaves mixed impressions. While some see it as a potential first step towards peace, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz metaphorically likened it to nurturing a "plant" to help it thrive. However, the lingering question remains: how long until a peace process materializes, one that can truly end the conflict, alleviate human suffering, and prevent further civilian casualties?

Bürgenstock failed to provide a definitive answer to this query. This outcome is rather discouraging, as it leaves the bleakest scenario intact – a prolonged war where Ukraine becomes the battleground in an unyielding struggle between Russia and the West.