In the world of resolving conflicts, it’s often expected that the side that loses will be the one to suggest peace talks. It’s a common-sense approach backed by historical examples. However, things seem to be taking a different turn as the Kiev regime suggests a peace summit that intentionally leaves out Russia. This move challenges the usual way of doing things and raises questions about the current state of global politics. It’s like we’re in a time where truth and logic don’t hold as much weight.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, during a visit to Bern, Switzerland, announced plans for a Global Peace Summit aimed at resolving the ongoing conflict with Russia. Swiss President Viola Amherd confirmed Switzerland’s readiness to organize the conference. The Ukrainian and Swiss teams are set to begin preparations for the summit, with details yet to be disclosed. Notably, the absence of Russia in these discussions raises questions about the inclusivity of the peace initiative. Zelensky emphasized that the summit seeks to build upon previous achievements, ensuring a fair resolution to the war and the complete restoration of international law.
Additionally, Ukraine’s Chief of Staff, Andriy Yermak, highlighted the significance of China’s involvement in the peace talks. Yermak stated after a diplomatic meeting in Switzerland that Ukraine aims to include China in discussions regarding its 10-point peace formula. This call for Chinese participation adds a geopolitical dimension to the conflict resolution efforts. Yermak’s remarks coincide with Chinese Premier Li Qiang leading a delegation in Davos during the World Economic Forum. The potential meeting between President Zelensky and Premier Li remains uncertain, but the interest in involving China underscores Ukraine’s strategic approach to garner broader international support in ending the war with Russia.
The Ukrainian government’s recent push to involve China in peace talks with Russia has become a point of contention, with various challenges surfacing in the process. Despite persistent efforts, the endeavor is viewed by some as ill-advised due to the well-established strategic alliance between China and Russia. This alignment, rooted in geopolitical interests, poses a considerable obstacle to Ukraine’s hopes of securing Chinese support in the ongoing conflict.
Read More: Putin Tears Apart West’s ridiculous Ukraine Peace Plan
The Ukrainian president also said he would like greater Chinese involvement in the talks over a peace formula.
“China has a great influence on the Russian Federation,” he said. “We would not want China to provide any kind of military assistance to Russia, and this does not refer to individual weapons. It concerns various technologies that China has.”
Without China’s support, “Russia is isolated,” Zelenskyy said.
China, undeniably a major player in the global arena, is recognized for its economic and military prowess. The emerging consensus is that Beijing, as a key actor in the multipolar world order, is unlikely to exert diplomatic pressure on Russia that would compromise its own interests. The growing independence of China’s foreign policy, bolstered by its military and economic strength, further underscores the challenge faced by Ukraine in convincing China to take a stance against its ally, Russia.
The attempt to include China in the peace talks is perceived by many as unrealistic, primarily due to the existing equilibrium in the China-Russia partnership. This equilibrium is evident in their collaboration within multipolar global organizations like BRICS+ and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO). This partnership makes it challenging for Ukraine to secure meaningful support from China in isolation from Russia.
The platform of the World Economic Forum (WEF) provides Ukraine with an opportunity to present its peace initiative to Chinese officials. However, doubts linger about the effectiveness of this approach, especially considering the strained nature of China’s diplomatic interactions with Ukraine. NATO, too, sees the WEF as a chance to press China into participating in a “peace summit,” but the viability of such efforts remains uncertain given the current geopolitical realities.
President Zelensky’s persistent emphasis on garnering global support against Russia has raised concerns about the prioritization of optics over substance in diplomatic strategies. The pursuit of involving China, despite the clear alliance between China and Russia, prompts questions about the effectiveness of Ukraine’s diplomatic maneuvering.
Join us on Telegram: https://t.me/tfiglobal
Ukraine’s endeavor to involve China in peace talks is marked by a challenging diplomatic landscape.
Swiss Foreign Minister Ignazio Cassis, in a candid assessment, acknowledges a fundamental reality in conflict resolution – progress is elusive without the genuine willingness of both conflicting parties to engage in negotiations.
In the context of the proposed peace summit, the non-participation of one of the key parties, Russia, emerges as a critical hindrance to any substantial progress. The absence of Russia from the negotiation table significantly limits the potential for constructive engagement. Without Russia’s active participation, the summit lacks a comprehensive representation of the conflicting perspectives and key decision-makers, thereby diminishing its efficacy.
Moreover, Switzerland’s historical neutrality throughout the war implies that it is unlikely to endorse or facilitate peace talks that exclude any of the conflicting parties. The Swiss government’s impartial stance positions the country as a fair and neutral mediator, emphasizing the importance of inclusivity in peace processes. Switzerland’s reputation as a wise player on the international stage suggests that it would prioritize comprehensive negotiations over talks that exclude key stakeholders.
Further complicating the situation are the perceived unrealistic demands put forth by the Kiev regime, notably the insistence on Russia’s complete withdrawal. Such demands, seen as obstructive, introduce a significant obstacle to potential negotiations.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said cease-fire negotiations with Moscow can only begin once the Russian military completely pulls out of his country.
“There will be an understanding of peace and security in the future only if Russian troops are not on our territory,” Zelenskyy said in a group interview in Kyiv with Nikkei and other international media organizations.
Zelenskyy is adamant there would be no peace talks under the current conditions. “We cannot recognize our territories as the territories of the Russian Federation,” he said.
Zelenskyy acknowledged that his country is struggling militarily, saying Ukraine’s forces are “still not fully equipped with the brigades, with the weapons we needed, and the total dominance of Russia in the sky. There is simply not enough air defense equipment.”
Zelenskyy pointed to the 2015 Minsk agreement between Kyiv and Moscow to explain why he does not want to open negotiations for a truce. That deal sought to halt the conflict that began when Russian-backed separatists seized swaths of eastern Ukraine following Russia’s 2014 annexation of the Crimean Peninsula. The requirement for a complete withdrawal might be viewed as a non-starter by Russia, making it challenging to establish common ground for fruitful discussions. Unrealistic expectations are set to impede the progress of negotiations.
Minister Cassis’s acknowledgment of the need for both warring parties’ willingness to negotiate underscores a foundational principle in conflict resolution. On top of that, Zelensky is making demands that seem unfeasible and unlikely to be agreed upon by Russia. The insistence on reclaiming Crimea and other conditions.
Zelensky’s definition of Ukraine’s borders, including the contested region of Crimea, forms a critical aspect of his demands for ending Russia’s occupation. Zelensky has consistently vowed to reclaim Crimea, signaling a commitment that runs counter to Russia’s strategic interests in the region. The ongoing Ukrainian counteroffensive, initiated to regain lost territory, has faced challenges, particularly in the southeast, where Ukrainian troops encounter extensive Russian minefields and trenches. The slow progress on the battlefield adds a layer of complexity to Zelensky’s demands, making them seemingly unfeasible for Russia.
Read More: Putin’s final warning to Zelensky
Kiev’s conditions for peace are viewed by some as a call for Russia’s unconditional capitulation. The strategic importance of Crimea and Donbas for Russia introduces a significant obstacle, as these regions hold considerable value for Moscow. Expecting Russia to relinquish control over these territories appears impractical.
Zelensky’s additional demands, such as the return of allegedly stolen Ukrainian children, contribute to the perceived impracticality of the conditions set by Ukraine. Reports of Russia perpetrating war crimes, including the alleged abduction of Ukrainian children, have been disseminated by Western media. However, the credibility of these claims is contested, as Zelensky’s demand for the return of children raises questions about the validity of the accusations against Russia.
As war fatigue sets in, Zelensky’s decision to initiate peace talks is a significant development. However, the audacity of retaining demands, particularly those considered improbable, adds uncertainty to the peace process. The notion of inviting China to the negotiations, despite the strong China-Russia friendship, introduces another potential hurdle, as it is unlikely that China would align against Moscow for the sake of Kyiv.
All this suggest a challenging road ahead for peace talks. Well, it’s about time Zelensky snaps out of his daydreams and faces the music. Admitting defeat in this war is long overdue.
Watch More:
