Last week (May 29 – June 2), Ukraine continued to advocate for security guarantees on the way to NATO. It may become a reality on July 11–12, at the NATO summit in Vilnius.
Russia is nervous about the strengthening of Ukrainian positions in Africa. They refuse to withdraw troops from the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant and threaten instability if Ukraine becomes a NATO member. Indonesia is proposing their own “peace plan,” and Hungary is urging to disable a Ukrainian counteroffensive.
While Russia is terrorizing Ukrainian cities, the war is spreading to its territory and makes the aggressor country keep their defenses in the Belgorod region.
Below, we talk about the key statements and developments of the war-struck week.
Waiting for Vilnius. Ukraine Wants Security Guarantees On the Way to NATO
NATO member states support Ukraine's Euro-Atlantic aspirations against the background of preparations for the NATO summit, to be held on July 11–12 in Vilnius. It is to offer critical decisions on Ukrainian membership in the Alliance.
Thus, on May 31, the Czech Parliament adopted a resolution which, among other things, supported Ukraine’s early accession to NATO. On June 1, the Latvian Saeima adopted a statement where they called on NATO to invite Ukraine to join the Alliance at the Vilnius summit.
Ukraine’s NATO aspirations have been also supported by Romania. It was stated in the joint declaration signed on June 1 on the sidelines of the summit of the European political community in Chisinau, Moldova, by President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky and President of Romania Klaus Werner Iohannis.
At the same event, on June 2, British Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak, confirmed support for Ukraine’s future membership in the Alliance, saying that “Ukraine’s rightful place is in NATO.”
On June 3, Ukrainian Foreign Minister, Dmytro Kuleba, met with his Estonian counterpart, Margus Tsakhkna, in Kyiv, and discussed Kyiv’s path to NATO. Following the meeting, Kuleba did not reveal the details but implied that Ukraine has a certain plan and is preparing for a step forward in Vilnius.
In addition, Ukraine itself is actively working to get closer to joining the Alliance. Thus, on May 31, Dmytro Kuleba addressed the foreign ministers of NATO countries, on the eve of their informal meeting in Oslo, and announced “three steps for the success of the Vilnius Summit”.
“Strengthen institutional ties and assistance between Ukraine and NATO. Take a step towards Ukraine’s membership in NATO. Provide security guarantees on Ukraine’s way to NATO,” said the diplomat.
At the same time, in his speech at the summit of the European political community, Volodymyr Zelensky said that the main priority for the security of our state is full membership in NATO, but before its acquisition, Ukraine seeks to receive clear and paper-fixed security guarantees.
The President reiterated the statements during personal meetings with the leaders of Portugal, Albania, North Macedonia, Great Britain, and with the President of Estonia, on June 2 in Kyiv.
“Give me an example of a NATO country at war with Russia, or a NATO country that has Russian troops currently present on its territory? It means that these are the best security guarantees for Ukraine," Zelensky said following the meeting.
The possibility of obtaining security guarantees and prospects for Ukraine’s NATO membership are of concern for official Moscow because one of the official goals of the so-called “special military operation” was the neutral status of Ukraine.
According to the press Secretary of the President of Russia, Dmitry Peskov, his country will continue fighting to prevent “the expansion of the Alliance and its immediate proximity to the Russian borders, including Ukraine’s membership in NATO.” The Russian politician also threatened NATO members that Ukraine’s accession to the Alliance could become a source of instability for years to come.
However, such aggressive rhetoric of the Kremlin causes the effect other than Moscow expected. Norwegian Foreign Minister, Anniken Scarning Huitfeldt, said during a meeting in Oslo that NATO countries would not allow Russia to decide when Ukraine can join the Alliance.
At the same time, most NATO members, except for Hungary and, possibly, several other countries, do not have an issue with whether Ukraine will join the Alliance – they rather discuss the timing. For example, Germany, the Netherlands and the United Kingdom, which provide significant military assistance to Ukraine, publicly say that Ukraine’s accession to the Alliance is impossible in the midst of war. At the same time, they do not reject membership in the Alliance after Ukraine’s victory.
Ukraine is aware of that, too. At the NATO summit in Vilnius, the official Kyiv wants to receive guarantees securing that after the war Ukraine will join NATO. Meanwhile, as the process continues (might be many years), Ukraine needs security guarantees to prevent any repeated aggression from Russia.
Russia Is Nervous About Ukrainian-African Relations and Refuses to Withdraw Troops From ZNPP
Last week ended the second African tour of the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine Dmytro Kuleba, which became a real threat to Russian influence. According to the Minister, Ukrainian-African relations are significant for political, economic, and social reasons. Moreover, such visits help to dispel Russian propaganda. After all, some countries are really sure that Russia is at war in Ukraine with the United States.
“We seek to ensure an effective vote of African countries for our resolutions in the UN General Assembly, as well as to encourage efforts within their capabilities to isolate Russia in the international arena,” Kuleba said.
The head of the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry said that Russian diplomats, feeling a real threat, tried to persuade African governments to cancel his visits. At the same time, Russian Foreign Minister, Sergei Lavrov, immediately departed on his tour of Africa.
During the official meetings, Sergei Lavrov said that the “situation” in Ukraine had allegedly developed as a result of many years of efforts by the West, which poses direct threats to the security of the Russian Federation and encourages the Kyiv regime to destroy all things Russian.
Furthermore, the Russian minister downplayed the role of Ukraine in ensuring world food security. He stressed the importance of reforming the UN Security Council through the representation of African countries and the unacceptability of a unipolar world order dominated by Washington. In addition, Lavrov labelled the “Ukrainian regime” as terrorist, and accused the West of supporting the genocide of the Russian people.
“We cannot tolerate a regime next to our borders, which, by and large, is used to repeat the aggression of Nazi Germany against our country,” Lavrov said.
The issue of nuclear safety was also raised last week. On May 30, the Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Rafael Grossi, at a meeting of the Security Council, presented an updated security plan for the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which provides for a ban on the use of ZNPP for storing heavy weapons and carrying out attacks from or towards the power plant.
The Russian side refused to implement Grossi's plan, noting that they would do everything possible to improve nuclear safety in accordance with national legislation and specialized international legal instruments. At the same time, at the meeting, the Russians accused the Ukrainian authorities of not wanting to commit themselves not to shell the ZNPP. Although the next day, the Russian side itself admitted that the power plant has military forces “necessary to protect it from Ukrainian attacks.”
The Ukrainian side declared their readiness to implement the Grossi plan but on condition that it be supplemented with two points on the complete demilitarization and de-occupation of the ZNPP. However, the occupation of the power plant remains part of Russia's military strategy, so international efforts in the field of nuclear safety remain in vain. According to the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, despite numerous appeals of the IAEA and world leaders, even the ZNPP satellite city Energodar is being turned into a military and logistics base by the occupiers.
Proposals For a “Peaceful Settlement” From Indonesia, China, and Hungary
Last week presented new ideas for the peaceful settlement of the Russian-Ukrainian war, but no initiative contained a key factor – the withdrawal of Russian troops from the internationally recognized territory of Ukraine.
Indonesian Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto proposed a ceasefire on the contact line and a “referendum” on the “disputed” territories. However, the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry immediately stressed that Ukraine does not have any “disputed” territories with Russia, and the only way to peace is to restore territorial integrity.
“Ukraine must immediately cease resistance, cease fire at the ‘friendly Russian occupiers’, move aside for 15 km and shyly wait until Russia, together with the ‘peacekeepers,’ holds a fake referendum 2.0 in order to consolidate its right to kill with impunity at gunpoint in the occupied territory... So?”, – commented on the initiative Mykhaylo Podolyak.
Similarly, the peacemaking tour of the China’s special envoy Li Hui, in May, failed to achieve a diplomatic breakthrough. Following the effort, he noted that the risk of escalation of the war was still high but neither Ukraine nor Russia closed the door to negotiations “tightly”.
Last week, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov reiterated that Putin was ready for any contacts so that Russia achieves its goals by means other than a “special operation.” However, Russia’s willingness to negotiate involves territorial concessions in any case.
Secretary of the National Security and Defense Council of Ukraine, Oleksiy Danilov, against the background of the intensification of peace initiatives, replied that Ukraine was not going to “open the door” for negotiations with the Russian dictator Vladimir Putin. As to the position of other countries on the negotiations, it is explained by the fact that “they defend their own interests and work out certain processes for their own consumption.”
The peaceful settlement was also promoted by a Hungarian President Viktor Orban, known for his pro-Russian statements. In an interview with the state radio, he anticipated great losses of Ukraine during a future counteroffensive. Moreover, the Hungarian authorities published a video calling for peace, where Crimea was portrayed as part of Russia.
Ukraine’s foreign minister urged Orban to persuade Putin to pull out – and “then there will be no counteroffensive.” At the same time, Mykhailo Podolyak believes that Viktor Orban once again ostentatiously insults the values of the European Union and the international law in general.
Finally, the European Union officially responded to the policy of the Hungarian president. On Thursday, the European Parliament “questioned” Hungary’s ability to preside over the EU Council in the second half of 2024, and condemned “anti-European actions” by the Hungarian government.
As you can see, the legitimization of the Russian presence in the occupied territories is unacceptable. Calls for peace through the mediation of various countries do not contain the principles of a just and lasting peace. US Secretary of State Anthony Blinken criticized any peace initiatives under the “land for peace” formula because, according to him, those prospects will lead to the “Potemkin peace”.
Russia’s Dilemmas: the Defense of Belgorod, an Attack On the Front, And the Mining of the Road to Bryansk
In May 2023, the Kremlin was particularly keen on intensely shelling Ukraine’s territory. The Ukrainian Air Force reported 21 attacks. Kyiv and Kyiv region were especially affected, since the enemy attacked with missiles and drones 17 times. However, the air defense showed fantastic successes: they took down 154 Russian missiles and over 400 drones. They managed to consistently show the 100% efficiency. Interestingly, the air defense also shot down 7 Kinzhal missiles, which, according to Russian propaganda, even Joe Biden is allegedly afraid of.
At the same time, the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine, Dmytro Kuleba, reminded: “Russian attacks on peaceful Ukrainian cities cannot be considered anything ordinary, no matter how frequent they get. All those are war crimes, and they need to be stopped by further strengthening of Ukraine’s air defense, including F-16 fighters.”
Mark Rutte, Prime Minister of the Netherlands, who together with the UK led the “coalition of fighters”, assured that his country “will continue to support Ukraine as long as necessary.” After all, “helping Ukraine defend itself is not a choice, you have to do it.”
The head of the Chief Intelligence Agency, Kyrylo Budanov, also reacted to the mass shelling of Kyiv on May 29. He is convinced that another attempt to intimidate Ukraine has failed. Instead, all those who tried to do this will very soon regret: “Our answer is not that far off.”
Interestingly, before long, on the night of May 30, from 25 to 32 drones (according to various estimates) attacked Moscow. The Russian Defense Ministry accused the “Kyiv regime” of this. The Russian Foreign Ministry strongly condemned “the attempts at terrorist attacks by the Armed Forces of Ukraine.” Putin’s press secretary Dmitry Peskov rushed to assure that the President of the Russian Federation will not comment on this incident. Peskov also said that the Ministry of Defense and the Russian air defense worked well, and he also convinced that the UAV attacks on Moscow were a response to attacks "on one of the decision-making centers."
On the other hand, Ukrainian Air Force spokesman Yuriy Ignat called the drone attack on Moscow “Russian internal problems.” According to analysts of the British Financial Times, Ukraine conducts the so-called “operations to shape the situation.” Their goal is to force Russia to overthrow the frontline troops in the border regions, divert the attention of the Kremlin’s command, and generally mislead them and create favorable conditions for the Ukrainian counteroffensive.
Attacks on the Russian capital have also found response among Ukrainian partners who are generally reserved in their assessments. They said that official Kyiv has the legitimate right to operate outside Ukraine. Thus, the German government believes that international law allows Ukraine to strike at the territory of the aggressor for self-defense purposes. British Foreign Secretary James Cleverly also said “using force beyond its borders” is acceptable. The White House claimed they did not support attacks on the territory of Russia and did not want them to be carried out with the use of U.S. weapons. However, “the United States does not tell Ukraine which targets to hit or not to hit, nor does it tell Ukraine how Ukrainian forces should conduct combat operations.”
Even the spokesman for the UN Secretary General Stephane Dujarric stressed that it is inaccurate to compare the drone attack on Moscow with regular missile attacks on Ukraine. The head of the European Parliament Roberta Metsola, in aninterview with DW, underscored that the EU should support Ukraine until Russia leaves its territory. According to her, the drone attacks on Moscow, that Russia accuses Ukraine of, do not change anything.
Recently, drones have been regularly attacking other objects on Russia’s territory. Thus, on May 31, the Afipsky oil refinery caught fire in the Krasnodar Territory.
After all, the Kremlin is so fixated on the seizing foreign territory that they have completely forgotten about protecting their own border from the Russians aspiring to overthrow the Putin regime. It is no news that the hostilities aggravated in Belgorod region. On June 4, the RVC and the “Freedom of Russia” Legion found themselves on the territory of Russia, again. They captured the Russian military and even appointed a meeting with the governor of the Belgorod region, Vyacheslav Gladkov in Novaya Tavolzhanka, but he did not show up.
British intelligence rightly believes that because of the actions of guerrilla groups in the area of Shebekino, the leadership of the Russian Federation faces a difficult dilemma: either to transfer additional forces to the front line or to strengthen the protection of their own border. Or, of course, they may blow up roads, as the Russians did near the border with Belarus and Ukraine. On May 31, an explosion occurred on the road connecting Chernihiv-Bryansk. SBGS spokesman Andriy Demchenko says: “As you can see, from ‘Kyiv in three days’ the Russians shifted to another tactics – they began to mine the roads, probably fearing that Ukraine would attack the regional center.”