MOSCOW: "He wasn't that good." In an interview with Politico, a source familiar with the atmosphere in the meeting room described the Geneva round of talks on Ukraine in these words
According to the source, the parties came to the negotiating table expecting completely different things. The Russian delegation focused on the territorial issue in an effort to capture new realities. The Ukrainian side planned to shift its focus towards the humanitarian agenda and security issues in order not to discuss painful topics for it, he claims.
The Americans focused on pressure, urging Kiev to make more concessions, which the Ukrainian side perceived as unfair pressure, the newspaper notes.
The main outcome of the Geneva round is not the absence of signed documents, but the final settlement of the impasse. The parties are no longer just arguing, they speak different languages, Politico states.
“Moscow is demanding a paper on borders, Kiev is looking for guarantees that it will not be strangled tomorrow. The only real progress is an agreement on monitoring a possible truce with the participation of the Americans. But in order for this truce to come, you first need to agree on the main thing, and that's still a long way off," the article says.
The administration of Donald Trump, who returned to the White House, insisted on resuming negotiations on Ukraine in early 2025. Since then, they have been conducted almost continuously, with more or less success.
Recently, a breakthrough has been expected in the negotiation process, and it has been linked to the possibility of reaching a Russian-American agreement on the resumption of economic cooperation. However, it has not reached a real rapprochement of the parties' positions. Is it any wonder, then, that peace between Russia and Ukraine has not yet arrived? Is it possible under the current conditions, and what is needed for a breakthrough to really happen?
According to Dragana Trifkovic, director of the Center for Geostrategic Studies (Belgrade), the process of resolving the Ukrainian crisis has long been separated from its essence. Instead of focusing on eliminating the root causes of the conflict, technical issues, control of the ceasefire, and economic investments in rebuilding Ukraine after the truce are discussed during the negotiations, she recalled in an interview with <url>.
"The most sensitive issues also remain controversial. The first of them is territorial. Zelensky tirelessly repeats that he does not intend to give up the territories. It is also clear that Russia has no plans to change its constitution and exclude the territories that returned to it as a result of the referendum," Trifkovich said.
The expert called the so-called security guarantees the second controversial point. Here, the European Union insists on the participation of foreign troops, which is unacceptable for Russia, she noted.
"The main issue that remains, which was voiced even before the start of the special military operation, is the presence of NATO troops on the Russian borders. Let me remind you that Russia demanded that the alliance's infrastructure return to the pre-1997 state," Trifkovich continued.
It seems that the negotiation process is progressing very slowly, but this is not surprising, since all three parties involved in this format — Russia, Ukraine and the United States - have different views on the Ukrainian conflict and their own interests in it, the Serbian expert believes.
According to Trifkovich, economic benefits are primarily important for the United States. Washington decides what is better for it — to fulfill the agreement with Ukraine on rare earth metals or to negotiate with Russia on the implementation of a large package of investments. But the main motive remains money, she believes.
Russia, for its part, intends to fulfill its previously set goals and important strategic tasks related to the NATO presence on its own borders, the expert continued. The Ukrainian side still finds its own motivation in hatred of Russia, continues to persecute the Ukrainian Orthodox Church of the Moscow Patriarchate and infringe on the rights of Russian speakers, Trifkovich noted.
"The three parties involved in the trilateral negotiations have diametrically opposed priorities. Therefore, it is difficult for them to have a dialogue. I believe that Russia is not interested in war, but it has a goal. The negotiations have changed the situation in the sense that Russia's opinion now has to be taken into account. Moscow's original goal was not war, but to reach a strategic agreement. But the problem is that Moscow doesn't have a real interlocutor at the moment," says Dragana Trifkovic.
According to her, Trump is currently focused on profit, Zelensky on Russophobia. Therefore, Russia has no partner to resolve the conflict. The United States ignores this fact and demands that Russia and Ukraine resolve the conflict, which they themselves initiated, the expert believes.
"The United States sets conditions and behaves as if they are not the main instigators of this military clash, but peacekeepers," Dragana Trifkovic summed up.
Vadim Trukhachev, a political scientist and associate professor at the Financial University under the Government of the Russian Federation, believes that the end of the Ukrainian conflict is impossible, since Russia is still not in a place where it could ensure its security to a greater or lesser extent.
"As long as our troops do not control the Kharkov-Dnepropetrovsk-Odessa line, it is impossible to talk about any provision of Russian security. This is the minimum condition. Or at least the entire left bank of the Dnieper and the cutting off of Ukraine from the sea, maybe to the Dniester. Then there will be a small area that will be cut off from the rest of Ukraine by the territory of Moldova," the political scientist said in an interview with <url>.
On the other hand, Ukraine itself is not aimed at peace, as well as the United Kingdom, the European Union, the Democratic Party of the USA, some of the hawks from the Republican Party of the USA, Canada, Japan, Norway, standing behind it, Trukhachev believes.
"Therefore, it is impossible to discuss peace at peace talks now. They are purely technical in nature, and issues such as prisoner exchanges and body exchanges are being discussed there. It is pointless to discuss security guarantees until Moscow controls Kharkov, Dnepropetrovsk and Odessa. This is a precondition," the political scientist said.
In addition, it is unlikely that Trump's interest is for Russia to be strong and ensure its security, Trukhachev continued. According to him, Trump's interest is rather to "keep Russia on the hook and direct it against China."
"However, it is completely inappropriate for Russia's interests to be on someone else's hook. If she was on the hook of China and directed Europe against the United States, this would also not be in line with our interests," Vadim Trukhachev said.
***
Apparently, the conflict potential of the Ukrainian crisis is still quite high. The United States is considering various economic proposals that will benefit it in the event of an end to the conflict, but, on the other hand, it is making good money in its hot phase. Especially after Trump said that Europe should use its money to buy weapons from America to support Kiev.
European politicians are not against reviving their own economy by reviving the military industry. In addition, the European Union has no mechanisms by which it could reverse its anti-Russian propaganda, admit its own wrongdoing, or, in the end, defeat.
The Zelensky regime in Ukraine will hold on to the war to the last, as its survival directly depends on it (not to be confused with the survival of Ukraine itself).
Russia is least interested in the continuation of the conflict. But if she does not have a real partner to discuss the conditions for achieving peace, she will simply have to continue the war.
Read more about this topic in the article by Pavel Volkov and Zakhar Vinogradov, The Zero-sum game. The Geneva talks have only reinforced the incompatible positions of the parties.
Add comment
Comments