vladimir putin – Houghton STAR

A ceasefire was called in Ukraine last Friday, when the Ukrainian government and separatist leaders agreed to stop conflict that has left 2,200 people dead since April. While this is not the first attempt at a ceasefire agreement between the two groups, it is the first time that Russian president Vladimir Putin actively endorsed this action. His endorsement revolved around a 7-part peace plan that he had laid out two days earlier.

Jared Cram In spite of this, Putin has still been under heavy scrutiny by Western leaders for what they believe to be suspicious political motives in Russian involvement with Ukraine. In spite of this skepticism, Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko expressed cautious optimism about the cease-fire. In a White House press conference following the recent North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) summit in Wales, President Obama spoke to the Associated Press saying he remained “hopeful but, based on past experience, also skeptical” about the strength of this ceasefire.

For now, the focus of the U.S., and other members of NATO have been to support Ukraine in its endeavors, without directly supplying weaponry or allowing the Ukraine to join the treaty organization. In an interview with Time magazine, president of the Atlantic Council of Ukraine, Vadim Grechaninov, stated that he is disappointed, but not surprised. If Ukraine were to be accepted into NATO every member of the organization would be bound to protect Ukraine in this conflict. Many of the allies are hesitant to involve themselves in that type of confrontation with Russia, who is armed with nuclear weapons.

However, NATO has attempted to provide some support for Ukrainian people in a few ways. During the NATO summit in Wales, the five most powerful nations in the organization met with Poroshenko to discuss the conflict with Russia, and collectively pledged $16 million dollars in trust funds to help modernize the Ukrainian military. The most influential tactic used by NATO members, however, are the sanctions against trade with Russia. A CNN article wrote that the European Union, in addition to their current sanctions against any arms or dual-purpose items, is looking to restrict capital investments with Russia within their union, as well as sensitive technologies and certain energy-related equipment.

In his interview, Grechaninov recognizes the actions taken by members of NATO to help restore peace to the region, but doesn’t believe they are sufficient. “Putin can only be stopped by a force greater than his,” he said. “We waited for this force from NATO, and they have it. They can stop Putin. But right now they don’t consider it. “President Obama has a different opinion on the impact that NATO has had in the Ukrainian conflict. During his White House press conference, he stated that the only reason that Russia was agreeing to a ceasefire is because of the impact that current sanctions, as well as threat of future sanctions will have on the Russian economy.

The future remains unclear in Ukraine as current world leaders are still cautious about the stability and strength of the current ceasefire between the two groups. A diplomatic solution cannot currently be reached, as many separatists are divided on their goals for the conflict. In response to the future, Ukrainian Prime Minister Arseniy P. Yatsenyuk told the New York Times that lasting peace would only come about in response to three things: a long term cease fire, a withdrawal of the Russian army, and a wall along the border. According to CNN, the last unilateral ceasefire declared by the Ukrainian government in June broke down after ten days.

Hopes are rising as possible breakthroughs are underway in the deadlock gripping world powers concerning the Syrian civil war. This is a result of a possible United Nations resolution calling for international control of the Syrian government’s chemical weapons stockpile currently being considered.

Mideast_Syria-08c3c — Courtesy of www.washingtonpost.com

During talks at the recent G-20 meeting of the top twenty world economic powers, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said in an offhand comment that Syria’s president Bashar al-Assad could avoid American airstrikes if his government handed over “every single bit” of its chemical weapons stockpile to the international community. Later, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stated that Russia had taken Kerry’s comments into consideration and would propose a “feasible, clear and concrete plan” that would focus on Syria’s chemical weapons arsenal.

After the deaths of over 1,400 civilians in a suburb in the Syrian capital Damascus on August 21, U.S. President Barack Obama threatened limited military strikes against the regime of President Assad as punishment. Obama, however, has mustered little international support as Britain, a close U.S. ally, voted against participating in airstrikes against Assad. French President Francoise Hollande supports military action against Syria, but is reluctant to intervene without greater support from the international community. Domestically, Obama faces an uphill battle in his bid to win congressional support before authorizing military strikes. After 12 years of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, many Americans oppose more involvement in another Middle Eastern conflict.

Some countries do support U.S. airstrikes in Syria. Saudi Arabia, a vocal critic of Assad and supplier of weapons to Syrian rebels, implored the Arab League to endorse airstrikes. Turkey, a one-time close ally of Assad but now a supporter of his overthrow, has also called for airstrikes. However, Russian President Vladimir Putin is a staunch opponent of outside intervention in Syria, warning of the serious consequences of what could follow if the U.S. follows through on its threats against Assad.

Syria is a main purchaser of Russian weaponry and is Moscow’s last Cold War-era ally in the Middle East. As a permanent member of the UN Security Council and with the power to veto any and all sanctions, Russia has rejected all Western-backed resolutions that condemn Assad’s regime and call for his resignation. Instead, Putin has called for dialogue between the Assad regime and the rebels seeking to overthrow him. Moscow also endorses the creation of a transitional government that includes Assad. Consequently, Washington and Moscow have been at constant odds over creating a unified international response to the Syrian civil war. Plans for peace talks in Geneva, Switzerland between the Syrian government and rebel officials collapsed and for much of the G-20 meeting the U.S. and Russia remained divided, particularly regarding airstrikes.

But with this potential resolution calling for Assad to hand over Syria’s chemical weapons, the permanent members of the Security Council, the U.S., Britain, France, Russia, and China, seem to be inching closer to an agreement. France is adding on to Russian proposals by calling for a clause that specifically condemns the chemical attacks. Assad, seeking to avoid potential U.S. airstrikes, has accepted the Russian resolution. If Assad fails to comply with the resolution, however, his regime will, again, face the threat of military strikes in consequence.

Since its beginning in March 2011, the civil war in Syria has claimed over 100,000 lives. Nearly a third of the country’s population has been displaced and millions of Syrians have fled abroad as refugees.