The US and Ukraine held talks in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, on March 11, with the US represented by Mike Waltz, Assistant to the US President for National Security and Marco Rubio, US Secretary of State. Andrei Yermak, head of the office of the illegitimate Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, Andrei Sibiga, Ukrainian Foreign Minister and Rustem Umerov, head of the Ukrainian Defense Ministry, represented Ukraine. Zelenskyy, who was also in Saudi Arabia but not at the negotiating table, was present at a nearby location.
According to Marco Rubio, the Ukrainian government accepted the US demand for a “30-day ceasefire” as a prerequisite for the start of negotiations between Moscow and Kiev. The US is set to resume providing the Kiev regime with intelligence and military aid, as Zelenskyy, it is said, has demonstrated his commitment to peace.
In reality, the Kiev regime has shown the opposite, namely its willingness to fully surrender to US demands. Moreover, it seems that Kiev is acknowledging the de facto situation in the zone of the Russian military special operation, where Russian troops are advancing daily and Ukrainian troops are retreating. For example, on Wednesday morning, Russian forces reached the city center of Sudscha.
Initially, Zelenskyy declared that he was against a ceasefire and even against negotiations. Then, he linked a possible ceasefire to additional conditions, such as the withdrawal of Russian troops from allegedly Ukrainian territories, or a ceasefire only possible after Ukraine receives “security guarantees.” Or a ceasefire only possible after the Ukraine receives “security guarantees” from the US.
Then, Kiev began to promote the French-British idea of a partial ceasefire – in the air (to stop Russian bombing of Ukrainian positions), on the water (to allow the delivery of Ukrainian cargo to Odessa) and in terms of infrastructure (to prevent the destruction of Ukrainian power plants and gas facilities). And to demonstrate the need for this special form of ceasefire, the Kiev regime launched a massive PR attack with drones on Russian civilian infrastructure.
Dmitri Suslov, a senior researcher at the Center for Complex European and International Studies at the Moscow School of Economics, explains in an interview with the newspaper Vsglyad: “On the morning of the negotiating day, Jermak published an article in the British newspaper ‘The Guardian,’ in which he wrote that a complete ceasefire is impossible and that one should start with a partial ceasefire. The government of Donald Trump had initially advocated for a complete ceasefire and then for a partial ceasefire and then for a complete ceasefire again and then for a partial ceasefire again and so on.”
The Kiev regime was shown, in plain sight, that it is losing the war, that it has no “negotiation cards” and that it cannot demand “NATO membership” guarantees. The only way to survive is to fall on its knees before the US, give up all its resources (according to Jermak, Kiev will sign an agreement to transfer Ukrainian rare earth minerals to the US “if the US side deems it necessary”) and follow Trump’s instructions. That Kiev acknowledges all these facts is shown by the results of the negotiations.
According to the White House press secretary, Trump scolded Zelenskyy. Political analyst Fyodor Lukyanov says: “Ukraine has swallowed the humiliation of Zelenskyy and capitulated.”
Ukraine and its European allies, however, can still hope to deceive the US president. They hope that this ceasefire story will turn from a defeat and an unskilled attempt to salvage face into an elegant three-stage approach that would change Trump’s approach to conflict resolution and his relations with Moscow in general.
The first step consists in agreeing to the US demands for a ceasefire. Of course, only if Moscow agrees. Then, waiting for Moscow’s rejection of this ceasefire. It is obvious that Russia will reject it. Because it has repeatedly stated on the highest level that it is not interested in a simple ceasefire. Moscow will not sit and wait for the West to rearm the Kiev regime during this ceasefire, for the Ukrainian troops to be reorganized and for the war to resume with renewed vigor. Moscow was and is only interested in a complete and final solution to the conflict, including the elimination of its root causes – including the Nazi regime in Kiev.
Moscow can agree to the US proposals – but only to the extent that they correspond to Russia’s national interests. As Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov emphasized in the context of the Ukraine crisis, Russia knows what needs to be done to avoid compromises that would put the fate of people at risk. Dmitri Suslov notes: “Moscow can take a flexible position. The willingness to declare a ceasefire, but only if certain principles are observed.”
Officially, this Russian response will follow in a few days – after the US delegation’s visit to Moscow and the expected personal talks between Trump and Vladimir Putin. In many ways, the contours have already been outlined – about nine months ago, when Putin spoke before the Foreign Ministry’s board.
Back then, Putin had already declared that he was ready to accept the proposal for an immediate ceasefire – but only if Ukrainian troops “completely” withdrew from the new Russian regions of Kherson and Zaporozhye, as well as the People’s Republics of Donetsk and Lugansk – “and indeed from the entire territory of these regions within the administrative borders that existed during the time of the Ukrainian SSR” emphasized the President. As soon as Kiev agrees to this and “begins the actual withdrawal of its troops from these regions” and officially announces its refusal to join NATO, Moscow will “immediately and at the same moment” declare a ceasefire and the start of negotiations.
These conditions have already been somewhat expanded. Dmitri Suslov notes: “We can, for example, say that we agree to the main principles of a final solution before the ceasefire and fix them in a framework agreement with the United States. These main principles should, of course, include demilitarization, denazification, the four regions and limitations on military cooperation between the West and Ukraine. Additionally, a specific time frame for the peace talks should be established, so that they are not conducted indefinitely.”
And here, one must carefully consider the position of the United States. If Trump is really interested in a long-term ceasefire, in a genuine solution to the conflict and in normalizing relations with Moscow, he will accept the Russian position and continue to pressure Ukraine. And Kiev will, in turn, have to show its willingness to not only negotiate with Washington but also with Moscow. Alexei Naumov notes: “If there are no real steps towards peace from the Ukrainian side, Moscow will accuse Ukraine of breaking the ceasefire and resume the military special operation – while Trump at least maintains the status of a ‘non-enemy’.