Ukraine: The Crisis Diplomacy Performance

Political and military options that Russia chose in the 2008 Russo-Georgian War, provided the ability to predict the Russian choices in the Ukraine's crisis for the other parties.The two options of recognizing the result of the referendum in East Ukraine as well as the option of entering Russian forces to the territories occupied by the pro-Russian militants were available after recognizing the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk by Moscow. Both of these options were implemented on Georgia, and Russia has been able to skillfully separate Abkhazia and South Ossetia from Georgia. But now, as the leader of the militants in East Ukraine is not calling for the secession from the territory of Ukraine, it can be concluded that Moscow has entirely lost its chance to recognize the independence of Donetsk and Luhansk and therefore any entrance of Russian military to this area means the same as military aggression against Ukraine.
But what changed the result of the game in Ukraine has probably been the priority of the issue of Syria for Moscow. Since the Presidential elections in Syria was taking place in a close distance to the referendum in East Ukraine, the possibility of forming a deal with Russia over the Syria was create at that point of time.
The deal was simple: military branch of the opponents of Bashar al-Assad leave the city of Homs and in return Russia stops supporting the pro-Russians militants.
At first, the opponents of Bashar al-Assad left Homs and John Kerry rejected the leader of Bashar al-Assad's opponents request to send weapons to them, and then the Russian military forces withdrew from the Ukraine borders and Vladimir Putin urged the East Ukrainian separatists to delay the referendum.
But about the destiny of gambling on Syria, we must admit that the White House has been the hidden winner of the game. Lack of reaction by Damascus on the recent Israel-Gaza conflict and even the lack of Bashar al-Assad's verbal support for Gaza despite his former anti-Israel stances and despite supports of Iran and Hezbollah in the Syrian Civil War in favor of Bashar al-Assad indicate that new Syria is created.

Ukraine's Issue: Ceasefire and Political Credibility of the West

Certainly, the number of people who were in favor of the truce in Ukraine were almost equal to the number of those who were in favor of continuing the conflicts in the country. European and American supporters of continuing the conflicts were often those who wanted to continue conflicts against the Russia through continuing the disaster in Ukraine. Probably a similar reason to this logic in Russia causes the continuous supports of Moscow for the pro-Russians in East Ukraine.
However, even if we want to look at this case in a pure mechanical way we notice that there are obstacles on using the Civil War as a way to fight against Russia. And the most important barrier is Kiev. Since the West is involved in Ukraine's issue, therefore we must admit that a part of the West's political credibility is now in the possession of the decisions by Kiev. Incorrect decisions by Kiev not only will lead the failure of Ukraine but also the elimination of a part of the West's political credibility.
Kiev has certainly the chance to achieve good advantages as the result of a secret deal with Moscow and finally will bring peace to the country by giving special privileges to Donetsk and Luhansk.
Who will lose in such a deal except the West?!
But the real threat is revealed when Kiev blackmails the West. In other words, by having such an opportunity, Ukraine can decide to persuade the West to gain some especial privileges.
So, as if the West is following to keep tensions with Russia like that of Moscow which is looking for something like this, it is necessary to give no major role to Kiev, in the conflict, in order to guarantee the preservation of the political credibility of the West.

Decision Pyramid of Russia and the Issue of Ukraine

West has been trying to force Moscow to change its policies on Ukraine through sanctioning Russia. However, these sanctions could not stop Russia supporting the pro-Russian militias in Ukraine. Thus, we can conclude that the only concern of the present decision pyramid in Russia as in the Cold War and the former Soviet era is to maintain their own personal interests (and not the rights and privileges of the people and Russia). That is why the strengthening of Gazprom as the most important economic center in Russia and also promoting the political position of Moscow during post Boris Yeltsin years does not led to a tangible improvement in the quality of Russians' life.
So it is convenient for the West to determine private and personal interests of the decision pyramid's members as the target of sanctions in order to realize the pressures against Moscow or in other words to make these pressures efficient.
Certainly, when the members of Russian decision pyramid separated their own interests from the interests of Russia, it is expected that the West identifies the mentioned separation to avoid wasting the resources and quickly achieve its goals.
An important point in this respect is that Moscow's dangerous decisions on Ukraine, which eventually led to the sanctions against Russia, have definitely been against the long term interests of big economical companies of Russia such as Gazprom. But despite this fact, these companies have continued their support of the Russian leadership, so doesn't this mean that these companies confirm the Kremlin's policies?!

Ukraine: The Energy’s Cards

Ukraine and Russia will soon enter negotiations about the sale of Russian gas but the difference in energy negotiations with the last time is that Kiev is able to undertake the Civil War and at the same time Moscow was not able to be acquitted from the charge of supporting the militants of East Ukraine and this means that the crisis of East Ukraine has become a winner card for Kiev, whereas in the last period, this crisis was considered as a victory for Moscow. But Kiev can be benefited by this card when Washington and its allies try to suppress Moscow in negotiations through considering failure factors of Moscow from vindicating the support of pro-Russians in East of Ukraine and victories of the president of Ukraine. It should be noted that Gazprom is the last trump card of Kremlin to change the game in favor of the Moscow, therefor; if West fails to apply pressure on Moscow, Russia will then be able to use Gazprom as a trump card.  
Ultimately, of course, putting the card of East Ukraine crisis on energy negotiations would be able to persuade Kremlin to make realistic decisions based on realism.

Who's Afraid of the Joker Card – Ukraine?!

The release of dissatisfaction potentials after the aftershocks of the Crimean crisis is the cause of the East Ukraine 's rebellion, it means that the crisis in East Ukraine like the Arab Spring and movements of the 50s and 60s in Latin America follow a domino theory or model and aren't considered as a dependent crisis. Success and failure of such crises strongly depend on the spatial and temporal proximity to the area of a political quake. The area of the political quake in Ukraine is Crimea. Thus, the longer the time span between the Crimea crisis and the crisis in East Ukraine, the less possible is the victory of the East Ukraine rebellions. (Of course, if the rebellion does not enter an armed phase.) 
The rebellions of East Ukraine need to achieve early and rapid success, because if their rebellion becomes prolonged, their rebellion will have the same fate that the revolution in Bahrain had experienced. 
Bahrain's Revolution has lost most of the chance to win because of getting away from the Arab Spring. Prolongation of the objections period for any movement or any revolution which hasn't been independent but has been related to another political or social quake and is a killing factor. 
Therefore, 'killing time' is a policy that can bring peace and stability back to Ukraine. 
Also, as long as Crimea is living in our mind, its motivating effect will also be living for the East Ukraine and Russia. Therefore,'silence' on the experience of Crimea is a policy that can perform as a catalyzer. Let's forget Crimea's experience before it becomes a model and a symbol for the Pro-Russian, through a psychological warfare! 
However, Moscow doesn't like the experience of the Crimea to be repeated about the East of Ukraine, but rather prefers to create a psychological warfare because otherwise the game will end.
It's about same the Nazi government of Germany which has won the most points through the creation of psychological warfare.
Unfortunately this isn't the whole story. If Kremlin feels to lose the game, it may choose any irrational choice like: Hitler, Muammar Gaddafi and ….
In other words, Moscow is trying to create a psychological warfare using the crisis in East Ukraine and gain points through this psychological warfare but if it feels to lose in this psychological war, it may use any unreasonable options such as military options.
Therefore the responsibility of the West is that,firstly the crisis in East Ukraine ends, and secondly, the psychological warfare does not end to an armed conflict.
About solving the crisis in East Ukraine some explanations were given, but about with standing against changing the psychological war to an armed conflict, it should be said:
Creating an active and temporary diplomacy channel with Russia about Ukraine's crisis create the illusion for Moscow that Western governments have entered the field of Russian game or that they have taken Kremlin's joker card in Ukraine; the card that should never be taken! 
On the other hand, China must know that supporting Moscow would not be unanswered. The issue of Taiwan, the Chinese market in America, the Senkaku Islands dispute are issues through addressing which Peking can be easily dissuaded from the idea of supporting Moscow in the crisis of East Ukraine.
For example: only promoting the slogan "Buying Chinese goods is supporting the Chinese government" can be minatory for the Chinese market in America, but this slogan shouldn't be addressed by the government and members of the political class, because the aim is not to create tension in United States - China relationship.