Article Ukraine peace talks falter in London as US withdraws top envoy (war community)

[C C]

https://www.helsinkitimes.fi/world-int/2...envoy.html

INTRO: Efforts to secure a ceasefire in Ukraine suffered a setback on Wednesday after the United States downgraded its participation in planned high-level talks in London.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio cancelled his attendance shortly before the summit, citing "logistical reasons" according to the State Department. However, US media reported the withdrawal followed Ukraine’s refusal to accept President Donald Trump’s proposed ceasefire plan.

The Trump administration’s proposal would allow Russia to retain control over most of its occupied Ukrainian territories, including legal recognition of the annexation of Crimea. Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi rejected the offer outright, stating that any territorial concessions to Russia were non-negotiable.

“There is nothing to discuss. That is our land. It belongs to the Ukrainian people,” Zelenskyi said.

The London meeting had been scheduled as a follow-up to talks in Paris last week, where Rubio had presented the US proposal in person. In his absence, the US sent special envoy Keith Kellogg to represent Washington at the lower-level talks.

According to British officials, Wednesday’s gathering proceeded at the official level, with Ukraine and its allies participating. Ministers from the UK, Germany, France, and Ukraine postponed their attendance. Ukrainian Deputy Foreign Minister Andri Sybihan was still expected to meet British Foreign Secretary David Lammy for bilateral discussions.

Both the US and Russia have presented ceasefire proposals that acknowledge the current frontlines as the basis for a potential agreement. The Financial Times reported that Russian President Vladimir Putin communicated a similar offer through US envoy Steve Witkoff, signalling readiness for a ceasefire aligned with existing military positions.

Putin also hinted at the possibility of relinquishing claims to four Ukrainian regions not fully under Russian control, despite these territories being declared part of Russia in constitutional amendments.

Trump’s plan, described by Axiose as a “final offer,” would formally cede Crimea to Russia, bar Ukraine from joining NATO, and restore a small area of the Kharkiv region to Ukrainian control. Under the proposal, the Zaporizhzhia nuclear plant would remain under Ukrainian ownership but be operated by the United States, which would sell electricity from the facility to both Ukraine and Russia.

The proposal does not include US security guarantees for Ukraine but envisions continued support from a coalition of around 30 allied countries... (MORE - details)

[Syne]

Zelenskyy back to being a spoiled brat. "My way or more of my people die."

[Magical Realist]

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyi rejected the offer outright, stating that any territorial concessions to Russia were non-negotiable.

“There is nothing to discuss. That is our land. It belongs to the Ukrainian people,” Zelenskyi said.

Yeah..this is pretty self-evident from the fact that Russia illegally invaded these lands and took them over. They don't belong to Russia period. None of Ukraine does. That's the whole point of fighting the war to begin with. Surrendering land to Russia isn't an option.

Zelenskyy back to being a spoiled brat. "My way or more of my people die."

There's nothing spoiled about not ceding stolen land to the invading country. Ever! Not in the history of the world. And not now. And the only reason his people are dying is because Russians are murdering them to steal their land. Fighting for your country is the only honorable option.

The similarity between the Russian and US proposals has raised concerns in Kyiv that the United States may be shifting toward a position that accepts the status quo on the ground. Observers also noted that Trump’s plan aligns closely with Russian demands and excludes long-standing Western guarantees for Ukrainian sovereignty and security.

Well imagine that. Trump and Putin in bed with each other against Zelensky. And now Trump can pull out of negotiations and blame Zelensky for turning down his "deal" while withdrawing US military support. It's a win win for Putin either way.

[Syne]

You can't demand anything unless you have leverage. Ukraine has no leverage.
There is no strategy where Ukraine finally gets enough of its own people killed and wins. Zero.
Ukraine can only come, hat in hand, to countries that do have leverage. But most of those are NATO countries who don't want a direct conflict with Russia (many still buying Russian oil).
They only want to be johnny-come-lately "peacekeepers" after war has ended.

[Magical Realist]

There is no need for any kind of leverage when a clearly offending party is involved. If someone stole your car, and furthermore continued to threaten to steal more of your possessions, you wouldn't require leverage to negotiate with them. In fact part of the negotiation would be to get them to stop AND to give you your car back. This is the case with Russia and Ukraine. The negotiation is for the war to stop (ie. get Russia to stop invading Ukraine) and to return the land it has stolen. There is nothing for Russia to gain or benefit from other than not having to fight against Ukraine anymore because they are the offending party. Being allowed to get the hell out of Ukraine alive is the only possible condition for ceasefire they get. And I'm sure there are a lot of Russian soldiers who would appreciate that.

[Syne]

Without someone to act as police, there would be no negotiating with someone who stole your car. If you cannot be enough of a threat (have leverage) to make them stop (and have no police to do so on your behalf), you will never stop a thief from stealing from you.

Russia has had Crimea for over a decade now. Zelenskyy wants Russia to give it back. Why would Russia do that? What's in it for Russia (who does have all the leverage)?
This magical thinking that simply because it's wrong Russia should just stop is childish nonsense. Russia has far more soldiers they can throw are the war than Ukraine does. So a war of attrition only ends in Ukraine's defenses collapsing and Russia taking the whole country.

But you have to live in reality to understand that.

[Magical Realist]

Without someone to act as police, there would be no negotiating with someone who stole your car. If you cannot be enough of a threat (have leverage) to make them stop (and have no police to do so on your behalf), you will never stop a thief from stealing from you.

Precisely why US serves as the mediator--as the police would with any offending party. Hence the lack of any need for leverage since Russia is clearly the offending party.

Russia has had Crimea for over a decade now. Zelenskyy wants Russia to give it back. Why would Russia do that? What's in it for Russia (who does have all the leverage)?

Why would Russia give back any land it has stolen? It wouldn't because Putin's an asshole. That's why he invades other countries to begin with. To gain more land and resources by murdering and bombing innocent people. So it looks like he isn't really willing to negotiate at all. It's all pretty much a ruse on his part. And Trump fails miserably. Meanwhile, Zelensky's time and efforts would be better spent securing jet fighters from the EU so he can bomb the shit out of invading Russian troops, especially after Trump so brutally stabbed him in the back on the world stage.