Afrasianet - Fahim Al Sourani - Writer Dmitry Popov believes that the silence on the political track of the Ukrainian settlement may be the beginning of the end of rhetorical diplomacy.
In an article on the Moskovsky Komsomolets website, Popov explained that this "calm" came two days after the meeting of the two presidents, Ukrainian Volodymyr Zelensky and American Donald Trump in Washington, after which it became clear that Kyiv would not receive missiles for Patriot air defense systems, nor (at least in the near future) licenses to produce them.
"Against this backdrop, Zelensky suddenly forgot his announced 40-day operation to 'force Russia to make peace,' which is over, and now he is only complaining that Ukraine, without a patriot, is unable to defend itself against Russian missiles.
Popov pointed out that the only statement worth mentioning was from Zelensky's adviser, Podolyak, who reiterated that Kyiv is proposing a ceasefire in the air and energy fields, in addition to freezing the guided missile program.
On the Russian side, there is also silence, except for the deputy foreign minister's assertion of what has long been known that Russia is willing to negotiate if the West is willing to address the root causes of the conflict.
He also points out that even statements by Moscow about the "terrorist nature of the Kyiv regime" have been lessened. After the Ukrainian drone strike on the beach of Gelingik, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said that "NATO andthe European Union have become part of international terrorist activity."
In his view, it can be assumed that the cries of victory over Ukraine's "turning point" in the war were overshadowed by the sound of Russian missile explosions in Kyiv and Odesa, and throughout Ukraine, and the smoke of dozens of burning Ukrainian ships at sea.
Secret meetings
The summer campaign, he says, exposed who was effectively in control of the conflict, which forced Ukraine, and with it Europe (which has not made any threatening statements recently), to remain silent, at least publicly.
Moscow has long insisted that media diplomacy is not working. Today, it is known that Kiev is seeking direct contact with the Kremlin.
Former high-ranking officials from the three European Union countries (the United Kingdom, France, and Germany) met with Russian officials in Vienna last July to discuss possible terms for peace talks aimed at ending the war in Ukraine.
Negotiate by force
In an article on the Politica website titled "When will Kyiv be ready for real negotiations with Moscow?" Konstantin Blokhin, a researcher at the Center for Security Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, stressed that the authorities in Kyiv will engage in constructive dialogue with Russia only when they feel a real threat to its existence.
Blokhin notes that the Russian leadership has consistently declared its readiness for negotiations, but the West and Ukraine are only willing to discuss a peace treaty on terms that are unacceptable to Moscow.
According to him, the current government in Kiev does not feel threatened so far, despite the heavy losses, and therefore does not seek dialogue.
"Ukrainian officials do not realize that everything beneath them is collapsing little by little, and they are losing their territory in the Donbas, and yet they are living in peace," he said.
The End of the Era of Compromise
Blokhin believes that the West and Zelensky will change their stance and engage in real negotiations when they feel that Ukraine's existence is threatened.
At the same time, he stresses that the main motivation for starting negotiations will not be diplomatic signals, but Russia's military victories on the battlefield, despite the desire of both the Americans and the Europeans for Moscow to make concessions.
He adds that Moscow is always ready for negotiations and open to a negotiated solution, and it has proven this time and time again. Ukraine has withdrawn from the negotiations, sometimes even prevented them.
The chances of a peaceful settlement depend directly on both the West's willingness to engage in honest dialogue and, at the same time, the situation on the ground along the contact lines.
________________
