Days after suspending his country’s participation in a grain export deal, Russian President Vladimir Putin quickly backed down, determined not to fuel a global food crisis, tacitly admitting that his veiled threats in this regard were a hoax, according to an analysis by The Guardian.
On Wednesday, Russia said it would resume its involvement in a grain export deal from Ukraine after it was suspended over the weekend.
Moscow’s announcement of the sudden downturn came after Turkey and the UN helped keep Ukrainian grain flowing for days without Russian involvement in inspections.
The three-month grain deal eased the global food crisis by lifting a de facto Russian blockade of Ukraine, one of the world’s biggest suppliers, before the prospect of its collapse revived fears of starvation and soaring prices around the world.
Russia suspended its participation in the agreement over the weekend, saying it could not guarantee the safety of civilian ships crossing the Black Sea due to an attack on its fleet there. Ukraine and Western countries responded that this was a false pretext for the purpose of “blackmail” with threats to world food supplies.
But Russia’s suspension of its participation did not stop deliveries, which resumed on Monday without Moscow’s participation in a Turkey-UN-backed program before Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan announced on Wednesday that Russian Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu told his Turkish counterpart Hulusi Akar said that the agreement will be renewed.
The Guardian believes that the decision, and then its withdrawal within days, clearly means that Moscow does not have a specific “plan”, and that what happened was a “humiliating turn” made by Putin after consultations with Erdogan, while “the only claim” was in the presence of “guarantees”. Written” from Kyiv.
Tatyana Stanovaya, head of the analytical institution “R. Politics,” says that after the suspension of the grain export agreement, it became unclear to Moscow how to implement this, since it is impossible otherwise than by military means, and that “this was not part of the Russian plans.”
In a video message late on Tuesday, before Erdogan announced the renewal of the agreement, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky said that thanks to the efforts of Turkey and the UN, cargo ships were still leaving Ukrainian ports.
These may have been private promises to Russia, including guarantees that it will be able to export its agricultural products. However, according to Stanovaya, the Kremlin’s latest decision shows that Putin backs down when faced with resistance or challenge, or that he “knows how to back off.” “. if it is needed.”
According to the Guardian, leaders in the West must now examine what prompted Putin’s retreat, especially after he recently showed an intent to escalate to save face on the battlefield.
Faced with a Ukrainian counterattack that began weeks ago, Russia fired hundreds of rockets at Ukrainian power plants and other key infrastructure to plunge Ukrainian cities into darkness and cold and threaten a humanitarian crisis as winter sets in.
The West was also concerned about Moscow’s threats to use all means at its disposal, including tactical nuclear weapons, to ensure the security of illegally annexed Ukrainian territory.
Ukrainian officials have taken the Kremlin’s retreat as an important lesson for the West on how to challenge the Russian leader.
And the adviser to the Ukrainian president, Mikhailo Podolyak, wrote that the Russian blackmailer (meaning Putin) is inferior to the strong, who can clearly express their position. He added that the way to stop the aggressor is a calculated show of force.
The Guardian pointed out that Russia’s decision to suspend the agreement would have angered Middle East and African leaders after Putin attempted to win their support, which was confirmed when Erdogan made it clear when announcing the renewal of the agreement that upcoming shipments of Ukrainian agricultural commodities were going in Somalia, Djibouti and Sudan.
The Russian blockade of Ukrainian exports across the Black Sea since the invasion began on February 24 has exacerbated the crisis of food shortages and the high cost of living in many countries, given that Ukraine is one of the largest suppliers of grains and oilseeds in the world. .
Putin considered that Moscow reserved the right to withdraw again from the agreement, the current term of which expires on November 19, but added that if he withdraws, this will not interfere with the supply of grain from Ukraine to Turkey.
While German Foreign Minister Annaline Beerbock said the renewal of the agreement shows the importance of standing firm in the face of Moscow’s demands.
the role of Erdogan
As for Erdogan, Putin’s regional rival, he became a major figure in the smoke of battle, playing a prominent role in the prisoner exchange when Russia freed besieged Ukrainians from the Azovstal steel plant in Mariupol after Moscow had earlier threatened to shoot them by court-martial.
As Russia’s isolation worsens both diplomatically and economically, Turkey’s influence is clearly on the rise.
A senior Ukrainian official, who asked not to be named, told Reuters that Moscow’s decision was primarily the result of Turkish pressure.
“I mentioned that Ankara might have the final say here, but I didn’t expect it to have such a big impact on Putin,” wrote Andrey Sizov, head of agricultural market research company Sov-Ekon.
Russian anger
Inside Russia, the grain export agreement angered even war supporters, who rejected “written guarantees” and in some cases accused the government of selling Russian soldiers.
“They don’t care about this war! The main thing is money,” wrote the administrators of one of the well-known Telegram accounts involved in mobilizing funds and equipment for the Russian army. “Politicians think so … As for our soldiers who almost died in the Sevastopol Bay, they do not care”.
Even pro-Kremlin bloggers and journalists could not resist criticizing the Russian position, and Alexander Kots, a correspondent for the pro-Kremlin newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda, also ridiculed “written guarantees.”
The “Colonel Kassad” account, which has over 800,000 followers, also called into question the usefulness of trust “regarding Ukrainian guarantees.”