© Telegram / vr_medinskiy
Sergei Lavrov said some formulations for an agreement are near completion, with neutral status for Kyiv under "serious" consideration.
Both Russia and Ukraine appear more optimistic ahead of another scheduled round of peace talks - even as Moscow continues its assaults on Kyiv and other major cities.
With Moscow's ground advance on the Ukrainian capital stalled, Russian foreign minister Sergei Lavrov said a neutral military status for Ukraine was being "seriously discussed" by the two sides.
Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said Russia's demands for ending the war were becoming "more realistic".
Read more ....
WNU Editor: Both sides are still far apart on issues like Crimea being a part of Russia, recognizing the Luhansk and Donetsk Republics, Ukraine applying to the EU, and security guarantees.
Ukraine President Zelensky And Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov Signal Optimism In Peace Talks
Ukraine and Russia signal progress made in talks -- Financial Times
Moscow and Kyiv say peace negotiations see progress although difficulties remain -- Washington Post
Zelensky, Russian minister Lavrov signal optimism in peace talks -- The Hill
Russia’s Lavrov sees hope of ‘compromise’ with Kyiv as Zelenskyy signals NATO shift -- Politico
Russia says parts of a Ukraine compromise deal are close -- Reuters
Russia and Ukraine ‘close to agreeing’ on neutral status, says Sergei Lavrov -- The Guardian
Russia Will Not Let Ukraine Obtain Nuclear Weapons, Lavrov Says -- Reuters
Zelenskiy says Russia’s position in negotiations is becoming ‘more realistic’ as fears deepen for Mariupol -- The Guardian
3 comments:
"Both sides are still far apart on issues like Crimea being a part of Russia, recognizing the Luhansk and Donetsk Republics, Ukraine applying to the EU, and security guarantees."
In the past when plebiscites were held they went down to the township level. Putin would wants whole oblasts and without the plebiscites.
EU is not a military organization. Unless that is a throw away negotiation point to be traded for something they want it is unconscionable.
Security guarantees? Russia could have been part of NATO 3 times over, if they took the slow track. Merkel and Macron could have got it done.
Why wouldn't NATO want Russian entry?
Rigged elections? They have them in the west.
Roman Abramovich level corruption? Solyndra does not come up that standard, but judging from the 2020 election it is not far off.
Putin a thug. Who but another dictator wants him?
NATO is to ward off his nutty ambitions
Putin is a thug and?
Maliki is a thug. George Bush came out all right with him. Obama did not. GWB engaged Maliki every day. And Obama? Well Obama is the smartest guy in the room. Obama gave us ISIS.
Post a Comment