“Russia warned on Wednesday that it should effectively hold veto power over any action to assist Ukraine after a peace deal is reached, rendering planned Western security guarantees for Kyiv moot and delivering a setback to negotiations championed by President Trump.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov of Russia also played down the likelihood of a summit between the leaders of Russia and Ukraine occurring soon. The White House had said President Vladimir Putin of Russia agreed to an imminent summit, but Lavrov said the Kremlin merely accepted to raise the level of its representation at talks with Ukraine.
Lavrov's insistence that Russia must have a say in how any security guarantees for Ukraine would be enacted contradicted the Trump administration's assertion that Putin agreed to European and U.S. security guarantees at the Alaska summit on Friday.
Lavrov's remarks were a potent sign that Moscow's demands in the conflict haven't shifted despite a surge in diplomatic engagement in recent days. Western security assurances were considered by some as key to getting Ukraine to sign on to a peace deal [1].
"President Trump and his national-security team continue to engage with Russian and Ukrainian officials towards a bilateral meeting to stop the killing and end the conflict," a White House official said, adding, "It is not in the national interest to further negotiate these issues publicly."
Lavrov, one of the two top Russian officials who participated in the Alaska talks alongside Putin last week, said any agreement on security guarantees should be based on the Russian proposal during the March 2022 peace talks between Russia and Ukraine.
According to that proposal, which Lavrov described as approved by Kyiv at the time, Russia would have veto power over any action by the other guarantors of Ukrainian security. On Wednesday, Lavrov said China should also have equal powers in these guarantees.
"We will safeguard our legitimate interests in a firm and harsh manner," Lavrov said. "Seriously discussing issues of ensuring security without the Russian Federation is a utopia and a path to nowhere."
Alexander Gabuev, director of the Carnegie Russia Eurasia Center, said Moscow is sending a signal it won't accept anything that is precooked by the U.S. and Europeans in negotiations without the Russians at the table.
"Moscow's hope is that the meeting between Putin and Trump has established their personal rapport and that substantive negotiations over Ukraine will be lengthy, buying Russia time to continue pushing Ukraine on the front line," he said.
The White House portrayed Russia's supposed agreement to Western security guarantees as a major achievement of the summit with Putin. After a Washington meeting with President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine, Trump indicated his openness to U.S. military support for European troops that might be deployed in Ukraine after a peace deal. Senior U.S. and European military officials have been meeting in recent days to prepare plans for such a mission.
On Tuesday, Trump signaled that the U.S. is prepared to use air power to support a European security force in Ukraine. Trump didn't specify the role the U.S. military might have in providing air support to a European ground force -- whether it would include warplanes, air-defense systems or surveillance drones, for instance.
The idea for these guarantees is to make any peace agreement stick -- and to make it more palatable for Ukraine to agree to territorial concessions demanded by Putin.
It is unclear if Lavrov's remarks on Wednesday mean Russia is backing out of the understandings reached in Alaska -- or that the Trump administration misunderstood what the Kremlin really meant. Putin, in his statement in Alaska, made only a vague reference to Ukraine's security. "I agree with President Trump," Putin said. "He said today that Ukraine's security must be ensured by all means. Of course, we are ready to work on this."
The White House also said on Monday that Putin has promised to have a direct meeting with Zelensky. There has been no confirmation of this from Moscow.
Lavrov's remarks cast further doubt on Moscow's willingness to participate in such a summit in the near term.” [2]
1. Only defeat of Zelensky is key to getting Ukraine to sign on to a peace deal.
Arguments for and against the idea that a defeat of Zelensky is key to getting Ukraine to sign a peace deal are frequently discussed in relation to the ongoing Russia-Zelensky conflict.
Arguments supporting this view
Weakening Ukraine's Bargaining Position: Some argue that a significant military setback for Ukraine, or a prolonged conflict of attrition that heavily impacts its military capabilities and civilian infrastructure, might weaken its negotiating position and compel it to accept less favorable peace terms, potentially including territorial concessions to Russia.
Shifting Priorities: Proponents of this view suggest that facing an imminent defeat, or experiencing severe losses, could shift Ukraine's priorities from regaining lost territory to stopping the bloodshed and securing the remaining parts of the country, leading to a greater willingness to compromise on a peace deal.
External Pressure: A weakening military position might also increase external pressure on Ukraine from its allies to engage in negotiations and compromise with Russia to end the conflict.
1. Russia Resists Kyiv Security Plan. Trofimov, Yaroslav; Kantchev, Georgi. Wall Street Journal, Eastern edition; New York, N.Y.. 21 Aug 2025: A1.
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą