Ukraine: does Russia even want negotiations?
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov has said that a peacekeeping operation carried out by European troops in Ukraine would be "absolutely unacceptable" for Moscow and that at this stage a summit meeting between the presidents of Russia and Ukraine would be premature. The Russian military has also intensified its air strikes on Ukrainian cities. Europe's press sees little scope for peace negotiations.
Moscow is not seeking peace
Lavrov's demands reveal the hypocrisy of Russian talk about peace, says De Telegraaf:
“He insists, just like wartime President Putin, on 'eliminating the causes of the conflict'. This is Kremlin-speak for the withdrawal of Nato troops from the alliance's eastern member states and the neutralisation and disarmament of Ukraine. Lavrov's attack on European 'adventurers' could be an attempt to sow discord in the West. What's more, his strong words were accompanied by one of the largest air strikes against Ukraine since the war began. Another sign that Moscow is not at all aiming for peace.”
Russia going back on its promises
Security expert Rainer Saks assesses the Kremlin's strategy in Postimees:
“Commenting on the possibility of a summit, Russia's foreign minister said that Russia could continue negotiations with Ukraine in any format, but that a summit would only be possible once serious preparatory work had been done at a lower level. This is a familiar tactic with which Russia is beginning to back down on its promise to the US president to participate in a summit meeting. Russia is exploiting the one-sidedness of US policy and presenting further demands, one by one, for its participation in a summit meeting. The foreign minister has made the first move and now the reactions to his monologue are being sounded out.”
The US refuses to see the truth
Journalist Vitaly Portnikov comments in 24tv.ua:
“Of course, common sense should have made the US president sit up and take notice of the Russian foreign minister's statements and realise that no one in the Kremlin takes him seriously and that all Putin's statements about a summit are nothing more than a bluff. But the White House simply decided to close its eyes and look the other way, announcing that a public discussion about further negotiations between Russia and Ukraine was not in the US's national interest. ... Neither Trump himself nor those who, despite the facts, still have faith in him have any interest in acknowledging the truth.”
Putin must take a clear stance
Putin is under pressure, political scientist Vladimir Pastukhov writes in a Telegram post republished by Echo:
“Putin is playing with fire. Trump, who has been humiliated and insulted in the eyes of Europe and his own voter base, is unpredictable and very dangerous. Incidentally, it seems to me that Washington suspected something of the sort and is therefore rushing things, unwilling to postpone the process for even a month. So Putin will have to make a statement in the next two weeks to clarify who is bluffing: him or Lavrov?”
South Korean model or Georgian scenario?
Libertatea asks what security guarantees can be provided without Nato membership:
“There are two non-Nato member countries to which the US has pledged security in strategic government documents, and with which it has had extremely close political and military relations since the 1950s: South Korea, considered an American satellite in the Indo-Pacific region, and Israel, an American satellite in the Middle East. ... In the current geopolitical context of uncertainty, these two countries are seen as positive scenarios for Ukraine, and thus also for the EU. Negative scenarios, on the other hand, would be Georgia (whose political regime is favourable to the Kremlin) and Belarus (a Russian satellite with an undemocratic regime in the former Soviet sphere).”