Negotiations with dictatorial regimes are only possible from a position of strength, as they do not recognize democratic values or international law. Freezing a conflict without real security guarantees only emboldens the aggressor, creating a dangerous precedent for changing borders through force. Supporting Ukraine is essential to preserving an international order based on the rule of law and preventing the growing threat posed by the emerging ‘axis of evil.’ Effective sanctions, restricting external support for the aggressor, and strengthening defense capabilities are key steps toward establishing lasting peace and stability.
This was stated in an extensive interview with Guildhall by Slovenian Member of the European Parliament (EPP), Matej Tonin.
— Mr. Tonin, the possibility of freezing the war between Russia and Ukraine is actively discussed in international debates. Many analysts stress that any form of freezing the conflict would come at the cost of compromises affecting Ukraine’s sovereignty — which, without real security guarantees, would effectively amount to a victory for the Russian Federation. When you hear such proposals, do you draw parallels with Munich in 1938?
— Absolutely. I see many parallels. The key message here is that negotiations with a dictator who does not respect democratic values, ignores international law, and acts solely in his own interest are only possible from a position of strength.
Putin attacked Ukraine in 2022 based on a miscalculation. He believed the European Union was divided, the United States was focused on other matters, Ukraine was fractured, and its government was weak. That misjudgment was a critical factor in his irrational decision to invade.
History teaches us that deterrence is only effective if the adversary understands that we are strong and unbreakable. The West — and perhaps Ukraine — made a mistake by underestimating this principle. In the future, we must correct such errors and never repeat them.
You cannot negotiate with a dictator on the basis of democratic standards. The only language he understands is strength and unity.
— Today’s situation stems from two main causes. First, the need to adjust the West’s strategy toward Russia, which we will discuss later. Second, the behavior of the Kremlin and actions of the Russian regime. The West, the EU, and the U.S. should not be held responsible for this war — Russia should. In your view, has the West set the goal of changing Russia’s behavior?
— I have my doubts. Even in my own country and in other Western nations, we are witnessing the spread of effective Russian propaganda. It instills in citizens the belief that the war would end if the West stopped supporting Ukraine.
In reality, the opposite is true. Putin could end the war at any moment simply by ordering his troops to withdraw from Ukraine. Instead, he uses propaganda to influence Western societies and pressure their governments into cutting support for Ukraine.
But I emphasize: this will not bring lasting peace. It will merely freeze the conflict, give Putin time to regroup, and then a new wave of aggression will begin. For small countries like Slovenia, this is especially dangerous. This approach suggests that in the 21st century, borders can be changed through the use of force.
We support Ukraine because we believe in the rule of law and the principles on which peace is built. If Ukraine is not supported now, tomorrow’s world will be entirely different — ruled solely by power and aggression.
— Today, Ukraine is standing not only against Russia, but against a whole range of dictatorships. Over three years of war, the so-called “axis of evil,” including Russia, has grown stronger. In Ukraine, we are seeing Iranian missiles, North Korean troops, and Chinese support for Russia’s military-industrial complex. How should democratic nations act to counter this growing threat?
— Putin is able to bombard Ukraine daily because he receives support from China, Iran, North Korea, and others. To move closer to peace, this support must be stopped.
We have the tools: for example, sectoral sanctions against China that would impact key areas such as technology and manufacturing. Diplomacy is also important — explaining to businesses and citizens the consequences of China’s support for Russia.
But words are not enough. We need action.
— However, against this backdrop, European leaders are speaking about dependence on China. How can this barrier be overcome?
— Yes, China is a major trading partner — but the dependence is mutual. The EU remains one of the largest markets for Chinese companies, and that gives us leverage. We must persuade China to respect international law and sanctions.
If the issue is ignored, then in 10 to 15 years, China’s influence will become so great that countering it will be much more difficult.
— How do you assess the current situation regarding military support for Ukraine? Are the EU’s efforts sufficient in this regard?
— Definitely not. For many years, we neglected defense, and now we are unable to supply even sufficient amounts of ammunition. We must urgently increase investment in the defense sector.
Moreover, the West is consistently late in delivering weapons to Ukraine. Every delay fuels escalation. Ukraine must be given the resources to reach force parity; otherwise, Putin will continue to believe that he can win through military means.
— Finally, in summary: alongside the goal of changing the behavior of the Russian regime, has the West set the goal of a Ukrainian victory?
— It all depends on political will. The West has the resources and the tools to ensure Ukraine’s victory. All that remains is for European leaders to have the will to provide them.
— Thank you for the insightful conversation and in-depth analysis.
— Thank you for the opportunity. Ukrainians are fighting every day not only for themselves but also for the principles we all believe in. Thank you for that.
Interview by Taras Mokliak, exclusively for Guildhall.
Только главные новости в нашем Telegram, Facebook и GoogleNews!
Tweet