There’s much discussion – and fear – in Ukraine and the Ukrainian diaspora about the so-called Steinmeier formula and its risks for Ukraine. On the right side of this page are the reactions of our major diaspora bodies, the Ukrainian World Congress, the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America and the Ukrainian Canadian Congress, to the news that President Volodymyr Zelenskyy had accepted the formula.
Ukraine signed a document agreeing to the Steinmeier formula on October 1 along with Russia, the “people’s republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk, and the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Significantly, it was Russia – the aggressor in this war – that insisted the formula had to be accepted as a precondition to the resumption of talks among the Normandy Four, i.e., Ukraine, Germany, France and Russia, for negotiations toward peace in Ukraine’s east. And therein was the cause for Ukrainians’ consternation. Protests against capitulation to Russia took place in Kyiv, where more than 10,000 demonstrators gathered, as well as in Lviv, Kharkiv, Dnipro, Odesa, Mariupol and some 25 other cities in Ukraine. Simply put, the protesters do not trust Moscow and fear that Kyiv is falling into the Kremlin’s trap. They see a sellout and a betrayal of Ukraine’s interests; instead of the Steinmeier formula, they see the Putin formula.
The sequence of steps foreseen by the Steinmeier formula is at issue and remains unclear. Nor is there clarity or transparency about the Zelenskyy administration’s plan for the occupied eastern regions, though the president did address the nation on October 3 in an effort to dispel their fears. “Do we want an end to the war and the return of all our territories?” he asked. The only way forward, he argued, is talks in the Normandy format, and these could not be held because of one obstacle: the Steinmeier formula. “Does the formula provide that Ukraine recognizes the annexation of Crimea and that it relinquishes the Donbas? No. Does it provide for elections to be held tomorrow and at the muzzles of machine guns? No,” Mr. Zelenskyy stated. What the formula does cover, he continued, is when the law on special status for the occupied territories will take effect – and that’s only after local elections are held under Ukrainian law and after the OSCE certifies that the elections were held in accordance with international democratic standards. “This is what we agreed to in Minsk,” he said, stressing that there will be no capitulation, no betrayal of national interests. All the rest – the removal of foreign forces from Ukrainian territory, the return of prisoners, control of the border with Russia, the participation of Ukrainian political parties in the election and the ability of persons internally displaced by the war to vote – will be discussed in the Normandy format, Mr. Zelenskyy noted.
And yet, no one knows what exactly a new law on special status for the occupied territories will say, or, for that matter, whether that Ukrainian law will be a subject of negotiations among the Normandy Four. There’s also the matter of a special law on early elections in Ukraine’s east: What exactly will that stipulate? And can we be sure that the elections will be held once Russia’s troops are out of Ukraine and once Ukraine re-establishes control?
Adding to the worry is that France and Germany are eager for some sort of deal to end the war in Ukraine’s east and for a resumption of business as usual. Meanwhile, here in the U.S., President Donald Trump had said during a joint press briefing with President Zelenskyy held on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly: “I really hope that you and President Putin get together and can solve your problem.” Clearly, Mr. Trump is not interested in helping.
Indeed, the way forward “is long and complicated,” as President Zelenskyy said on October 3, while calling for unity, urging the people of Ukraine to not fall for “manipulations and provocations,” and pledging that he will not cross any “red lines.” But troublesome questions remain. We take the president at his word that his “mission” is “to end the war,” and we pray that he will not abandon Ukrainians living on the occupied territories of the Donbas, though that is precisely what many locals see in the withdrawal of Ukrainian forces from parts of the Donetsk and Luhansk regions.
It’s a dangerous game Mr. Zelenskyy is playing with a dangerous foe. The people of Ukraine surely do want the war to end, but just as surely they do not want peace at any cost.