Advisor to the President of Ukraine says what to do to force Russia to end the war
“Die Welt”: There were many plans and initiatives to end this war. This attempt seems to be different from all the previous ones. Is that so?
Mikhail Podolak: First of all, this is a project that must be discussed at the level of Ukraine, the US and Europe. I would divide this project into three parts. First, it is about ending the war in Ukraine. Secondly, it is about the European defense doctrine, i.e. security guarantees. Thirdly, it is about economic relations between the US, Russia, Europe, handling of assets and so on.
The fact is that these are already known proposals that have been improved, nothing more. Of course, the design of this plan still needs to be discussed further. This discussion will also take place at the presidential level. Next week, President Zelensky and President Trump will talk to each other. In my opinion, European leaders should also participate.
But the clock is ticking. The plan comes with an ultimatum.
Well, I think it's not about an ultimatum, but that proper consultations should take place by Thursday and a solution should be found. To end a war like the one going on in Ukraine, a more detailed study is needed. By the way, Putin also said this: that all points of this project must be worked out in detail. Moreover, Trump mentioned in parallel that the United States would use pressure measures against Russia, i.e. sanctions and similar measures.
The article continues below the video
I advise you to stay calm and look at all projects and plans calmly. In this phase of the war, making final demands is, of course, more informational rhetoric than reality. Reality must be assessed: for example, whether Russia even wants to stop. As for us: yes, we are ready for diplomatic talks. We can't make a decision within a week, but we can discuss it.
This plan looks like a set of Russia's maximum demands. Are there any points that Ukraine can agree on or on which Kiev sees a possibility of agreement, or are there no such points?
The key point in US actions is the specific desire to end the war. The question, however, is whether Russia's motives are understood and what security guarantees Moscow will agree to. This is about everything related to the armed forces of Ukraine, everything related to the range of Ukrainian weapons.
If it were determined that Kiev must give up its long-range weapons, it would mean that we would be defenseless. This issue requires additional discussion. I think the United States understands this too. I think the US is ready for a constructive approach. We are ready for it.
Putin has a plan. “We see what Russia is doing”
And Russia?
I have no doubt that as soon as specific discussions on individual points begin, Russia will present new, much higher demands.
Many of the points that are currently in this plan were already discussed in the spring of 2022 in Istanbul. And it was basically clear that these points could never be implemented. Do you see even the slightest signs of willingness to resolve the conflict on the Russian side?
The Kremlin wants to return to some kind of post-Soviet concept of territory control. They don't want to end the war. It's obvious. The negotiation process was not realistic then either. No realistic scenarios for exiting this war have been presented. We see what Russia is doing, that, on the contrary, it is intensifying attacks on the civilian population, that it is intensifying attacks in general. We are ready to discuss. To this end, we should calmly consider the US proposals, take advisory actions and not automatically reject them. Conversely, we want it to be shown for the last time that Russia does not want to withdraw from the war.
One could say that this has already been proven many times.
Therefore, we believe that when President Trump finally realizes that Russia is not ready to end the war and give up the concept of expansion, it will be necessary to use completely different instruments. So, sanctions in a different scope, financial isolation of Russia in a different scope, full use of currently frozen Russian assets to finance defense programs, and finally a completely different level of weapons supplies, a significant strengthening of attacks deep into the Russian Federation. Otherwise it won't work.
In the current plan, all responsibility rests with Ukraine, nothing is required from Russia. What does this say about Ukraine-US cooperation?
A lot of the weapons we use, a lot of the investment in the weapons industry, a lot of the confidential information we receive comes from the United States. Moreover, Europe's consolidated position is also thanks to the Americans. The US is increasing its arms sales programs thanks to European funds. Moreover, we should not forget that Washington is currently applying sanctions that Europe will not be able to approach for a long time. This means that the United States is a close partner of Ukraine.
Another issue is that they rely on their own understanding of the situation in their proposals for ending the war. Because we understand the motivations of Russia today, we believe that without putting significant pressure on Moscow, no proposal will work. We accept the US position, we understand Washington's motivation, but we would like to explain, based on facts, why adjustments and additional pressure on Russia are necessary.
“To force Russia to end this war, three things must be done”
This plan was announced just a week after a very large corruption scandal in Ukraine was revealed. Do you think this is just a coincidence or are these two events related?
I am not a supporter of conspiracy theories. Please understand that Ukraine as a country is undergoing an internal transformation. Unfortunately, we are a post-Soviet country. And corruption is an inherent element of post-Soviet economies. Not only in Ukraine. It's not about whether corruption exists or not. It's about how quickly and how severely the state responds to such cases. The Ukrainian state, the presidential office and other state institutions reacted quickly. As for the draft US plan, I think that is a separate issue.
One of the points of this plan is the elections in Ukraine. Currently, such choices are not possible for logistical and legal reasons. However, personnel changes in the government and the presidential office are possible. Are there any changes coming?
I am against this issue. Why? Because democracy cannot be unelected. Of course, wartime limits electoral processes. Every night we are attacked. A large number of people are directly involved in warfare in one way or another. It's not about someone wanting to take over power or not wanting elections. The president has repeatedly said that as soon as we reach a permanent, guaranteed end to the fighting, elections – both presidential and parliamentary – will be organized and held in a relatively short time. In my opinion, this is not a demand, but follows from the logic of the post-war period.
To sum up, can we risk the thesis that the current negotiation process is the beginning of the end of the war, or rather a transition to another stage, another phase of this war?
First, Ukraine is definitely ready for the negotiation process and ready to end the war. Secondly, I advise everyone to look at Putin's speeches, the emotional tone of these speeches, and then it will become clear that Russia does not want an end to the war, but an endless war of varying intensity. For them, ending the invasion is impossible – because war can justify anything: internal restrictions, external provocations, for example towards Europe, especially Northern Europe.
To force Moscow to end this war, three things must be done: Russia should not be offered pointless negotiations, but should significantly limit its access to financial resources on world markets. Secondly, attacks on Russian territory should be significantly strengthened, that is, its military resource base should be destroyed. Without this, this cannot be achieved because Russia is expanding this base. And if they switch their economy to militarism, what do you think they will do in three years? And of course, the third thing is to limit any influence Russia has on various countries in terms of information policy and diplomacy. We need to listen carefully to Putin.
