Volodymyr, meet Vladimir: Can Ukraine dare to dream of peace?

On Monday, Volodymyr Zelensky and Vladimir Putin will meet for the first time with the purpose of negotiating peace – but it’s the Russian leader who holds all the cards, says Oliver Carroll

The result of the meeting between the two leaders will almost certainly be a new stalemate (Getty)

When Volodymyr Zelensky finally gets to look Vladimir Putin in the eye in Paris on Monday, he will be doing so almost entirely on the latter’s terms.

From the day of his inauguration in May, Mr Zelensky has pushed for a summit of the ‘Normandy’ quartet of France, Germany, Ukraine and Russia. Meeting with his opposite number in the Kremlin was, as the rookie president saw it, a crucial part of his pre-election promise to end Ukraine’s five-year war in 12 months. And just as keen to secure the tetes-a-tetes was French president Emmanuel Macron, eager to make his mark on the world and build better relations with Moscow.

But agreeing a date with Mr Putin proved anything but straightforward, taking six months and several “confidence-building” concessions. Most controversially, it meant Ukraine agreeing to fast-track an amnesty and elections in the conflict zones of the Donbass.

On his part, Mr Zelensky has presented the mere fact of getting Russia to the negotiation table as a victory. On Friday night, he told a talk show audience that the Paris talks would allow him to “get an understanding and a sense that everyone wants to end this tragic war”.

But throughout that war – which has cost thousands of lives – Vladimir Putin has demonstrated a knack of only ever negotiating while on the front foot.

He entered into a first peace deal (“Minsk 1”) in September 2014 at the end of a withering three-week surge by Russian-backed forces that demoralised and decimated Ukrainian troops. He signed a second agreement (“Minsk 2”) in February 2015 – as the midnight oil burned and a bloody battle was ongoing in the strategic railway town of Debaltseve.

This time around, Moscow believes the tide is once again turning in its favour, with local commentators suggesting the haste of others has opened up the possibility of an early deal on sanctions.

“Putin holds all the cards for this meeting, while Zelensky and Macron have already wasted their leverage by appearing eager for a deal,” said the former Russian diplomat Vladimir Frolov. “It is a mistake to think that Moscow is under any pressure to deliver here.”

The same cannot be said for Mr Zelensky, who has come under heavy attack at home from political opponents who criticise his rush for a meeting.

Pavlo Klimkin, who served as Ukraine’s foreign secretary up until summer this year, told The Independent that Mr Zelensky had “failed to appreciate Putin’s long-term strategic goals” by easily agreeing to Moscow’s terms for the summit. The Russian president would now force Ukraine into a “rigid” interpretation of the Minsk agreements that “will put Ukraine’s security at risk”.

“Zelensky somehow thinks that he will win him over with his charisma, which is incredibly naive,” Mr Klimkin said. “He needs to understand Putin wants to break up Ukraine by using the Minsk agreements as a nucleus for a new type of federalisation. He’s trying to create a new set of realities in Ukraine.”

At least part of the Ukrainian public is nervous about the prospect of concessions to Moscow.

According to a recent poll by Ukrainian think tank​ Razumkov Centre, the majority of Ukrainians say they are against plans for an amnesty (59 per cent) and a special status for the Donbass (56 per cent). Protests against President Zelensky's peace plans have already attracted tens of thousands, while former president Petro Poroshenko and others have announced another rally for Sunday.

But other polls suggest a larger majority of Ukrainians back Mr Zelensky's efforts to break through the deadlock in more general terms. Patience had been wearing thin with the previous government's absent peace strategy. Even friendly European diplomats despaired at growing intransigence on humanitarian issues like paying pensions to those living in separatist controlled areas.

“It’s all very well for Poroshenko and his allies to say that the status quo is fine,” said Nataliya Gumenyuk, a prominent Ukrainian journalist who has reported extensively from the conflict zone. “They all live in Kiev, so perhaps it’s fine for them. But it isn’t OK for those living in the east. A war is going on and people are dying every week. Unlike Poroshenko, Zelensky has a plan to end it.”

President Zelensky’s team meanwhile insists he is going into the negotiations with “eyes wide open”.

According to presidential advisor Nikita Poturayev, Ukraine has focused on achieving “pragmatic and realistic solutions” in three areas. First, a complete exchange of all prisoners. Second, a ceasefire along the entire 250-mile frontline. Third, preparation for elections in the conflict zone – “only under Ukrainian law and preceded by the withdrawal of military units”.

The eventual communique will almost certainly deliver a timescale for the prisoner exchange, Mr Poturayev said. The sides were also discussing elections and a ceasefire — but it was down to the presidents to agree on details. “We believe Russia will respond to our constructive proposals. Doing nothing is not an option.”

A recurring point of contention remains how and when Ukraine regains control of its eastern border, which has been under de facto Russian control since summer 2014.

The Minsk peace agreements do not explicitly state a sequencing to the border issue. But according to the order in which they appear on paper, elections do come first. This is Russia’s position. Ukraine, on the other hand, has argued that such sequencing undermines the legitimacy of any elections.

On the Friday night talk show, President Zelensky said Ukraine planned to revisit this crucial issue, hinting at plans to reopen the Minsk agreements.

“We have another plan for the border – how it will be transferred and how and when Ukraine will control it,” he said.

Moscow is almost certain to block such endeavours. It considers the Minsk-2 agreements, negotiated while Ukraine was on a back foot, as crucial to its strategic goal of retaining influence in the former Soviet state.

“Zelensky will hit a brick wall when he starts talking about upgrading Minsk or changing the sequencing to secure the border first,” the former diplomat Mr Frolov told The Independent. “He may also be surprised to find out that Macron will be on Putin’s side.”

Mr Macron’s increasing willingness to side with Moscow has certainly caused disquiet in Kiev. German chancellor Angela Merkel, on the other hand, is likely to stay more sympathetic – especially after events of the last week that saw Germany expel two Russian officials after linking Moscow to a “bicycle assassin” in Berlin.

The result will almost certainly be a new stalemate – albeit with the sides ending negotiations with improved bonhomie.

“We will consider it a success even if the final text says that the sides agree to continue negotiating,” said Mr Poturayev. “De facto, that would mean diplomacy has resumed.”