"Give up Donbas - then there will be negotiations" - political analyst explains Kremlin's negotiation tactics
Kyiv • UNN
Political analyst Oleh Lisnyi explained Moscow's change in rhetoric and the demand for the AFU to withdraw from Donbas. He emphasized the necessity of systematic strikes on Russian oil refineries.
Russia is no longer even trying to create the illusion of readiness for compromise in the war against Ukraine. Against the backdrop of attacks on Russian territory, strikes on oil refineries, panic surrounding May 9, and contradictory statements from the Kremlin, questions are increasingly being raised: is Putin's system beginning to falter, and is a moment possible when the Russian elites or society will start looking for a way out of the war?
Political scientist Oleh Lisnyi, in an interview with UNN, explained why Moscow has now sharply changed its rhetoric regarding negotiations, whether Putin is truly afraid of losing control over the system, why strikes on Russian territory must become "chronic," and whether Russians are capable of an internal revolt.
Russia has stopped even imitating readiness for compromise
Lisnyi calls the Kremlin's latest statements—specifically those from Putin's aide Yuri Ushakov, claiming that negotiations are only possible after the Ukrainian Armed Forces withdraw from Donbas—indicative. According to him, Moscow previously at least tried to create the appearance of readiness for dialogue, fearing harsh sanctions from the US. However, the situation has now changed.
"They were doing their best to maintain not the initiative, but the imitation that they were ready to communicate with the US regarding the Russian-Ukrainian war. But now they see that the Iranian case has diverted attention, oil money is flowing again, sanctions are not being tightened but, on the contrary, are being softened in some places. And the risk of receiving a serious blow from the US is currently minimal for them,"
In his opinion, the Kremlin has returned to its old tactic: putting pressure not on itself, but on Ukraine through Washington.
"They think the simplest thing is to pressure Kyiv again through the United States. As if to say, 'See, we aren't making concessions, so pressure Ukraine.' But they are mistaken here. It didn't work before, and it won't work now,"
At the same time, he points out that Ushakov's statement is effectively a slap in the face to Donald Trump.
"Ushakov said something very insulting to Trump. Because if negotiations are only possible after Ukraine's withdrawal from Donbas, then everything that happened before wasn't negotiations at all. It was some kind of preparation for preparation. They simply decided that right now Trump won't react painfully to such things,"
The Kremlin is playing "good cop, bad cop"
Separately, Lisnyi commented on the contradictory statements from the Kremlin, where some government representatives speak of ultimatums while others speak of readiness for negotiations, even with EU participation.
"This is an absolutely normal story for them. They always play it this way—one good cop, one bad cop. This is the Chekist school; it doesn't change. They put their eggs in different baskets,"
According to the political scientist, Peskov's statements about the possibility of negotiations with Europe are linked to an attempt to diminish the role of the US in the negotiation process.
"Europeans started saying that Brussels could be one of the negotiation centers if the US steps aside. And the Kremlin immediately started playing into that. It's an attempt to lower the US stakes in this process,"
"The rules of the game in Russia haven't changed—they are dictated by one person"
Commenting on materials by Russian authors regarding a supposed crisis within the elites and a lack of understanding of the "rules of the game," Lisnyi stated that Putin's system remains stable.
"I don't believe the rules of the game there have changed. They have remained the same. They are dictated by one person—plus a few admitted individuals. It's a different matter that conflicts between different security groups may be starting within the system,"
The political scientist suggests that the conflict between the FSB, FSO, and the military may currently be intensifying.
"Putin has effectively surrounded himself with guards. He lets no one near him. Because of this, the FSO's influence is growing, as they are the ones who control access to 'the body.' Other security officials cannot like this. Similarly, there is the army, which also has its own interests. And then there is business, which doesn't like that the 'pie' is getting smaller,"
However, according to him, this does not yet mean the beginning of the system's collapse.
"Putin's authority may have faltered somewhere. But not to the extent that the system would start to crumble,"
"Strikes on oil refineries must become chronic"
Lisnyi believes that the key to weakening Russia is not a single large-scale event, but systemic pressure in several directions simultaneously.
"Everything hinges on the situation at the front. If Russia cannot advance and Ukraine has successes, that is one of the key factors. But systemic strikes on the economy are no less important,"
According to the political scientist, strikes on Russian oil refineries are already having an effect, but it is not enough.
"Refineries need to be taken out systematically. These strikes must be chronic in nature. Because right now, it's still more of a political and media blow than a full-fledged economic one,"
Lisnyi pointed out that even Russian propaganda can no longer completely hide the consequences of Ukrainian attacks.
"Moscow was no longer able to keep quiet about it. Putin was forced to listen to daily reports on what was happening. And Russian propagandists started raising money for infrastructure restoration. And all of Russia saw it,"
"The 'Black Swan' for Russia is not a single event"
The political scientist believes it is a mistake to think that the Russian system could fall due to one major blow.
"My 'black swan' theory is that there cannot be just one. It will be a combination of factors—the front, the economy, public discontent, sanctions, and strikes on infrastructure,"
At the same time, he admits that without full-fledged sanction pressure from the US, this process will be very slow.
"The problem is that right now, it is very difficult to count on maximum pressure from the US,"
"Russians can only revolt when they see a weak Tsar"
Separately, Lisnyi commented on the possibility of an internal social explosion in Russia. He does not believe in a classic popular revolution but allows for a different scenario.
"Such processes can only begin when Russians see that the center has weakened. That the Tsar is faltering and can no longer punish. Only then might they start doing something,"
The political scientist believes that the drivers of the crisis are more likely to be the elites rather than ordinary Russians.
"I don't believe in a great 'Russian revolt.' Rather, it will be regional or economic elites who realize it is more profitable for them to live without Moscow or without the current model,"
"Putin needs at least some kind of 'victory'"
According to Lisnyi, strategically the situation remains bad for Putin, but tactically he is still looking for an opportunity to maintain control.
"He currently has one task—to invent a victory and sell it to society. For example, to say: 'We liberated Donbas, we fought for this.' And then push it through propaganda,"
However, according to him, Ukraine is not allowing the Kremlin to implement this scenario.
"Putin is the war, and the war is Putin. He has tied himself so closely to this war that without it, his system begins to lose its meaning," Lisnyi concluded.