As he tries to push for an agreement to end the war, he has made clear that has no intention of changing its demands. Despite diplomatic contacts between Washington, kyiv and Moscow, the Kremlin insists that its position remains the same.
Trilateral meetings were held during January and early February to explore possible solutions to the conflict, and a new round of talks is expected. However, at the same time, senior Russian officials have come out publicly to deny the idea that negotiations are moving forward in the direction desired by the United States.
The clearest message came from Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who for three days in a row, between February 9 and 11, rejected claims of substantial progress in the dialogue. His statements made it clear that Moscow It does not accept some of the elements that are key within the peace framework that is being discussed.
This position contrasts with Washington’s speech, which speaks of progress and a possible rapprochement between the parties. The Kremlin, on the other hand, insists that any agreement must recognize Russian conditionsindicating that the differences remain profound.
Negotiations seem to be moving in two opposite directions: The United States is trying to accelerate an agreement, while reaffirming its demands and drawing red lines. The result is a diplomatic process that moves forward with difficulty and without clear signs of a close commitment.
“The Kremlin has shown no sign of being willing to give up on its main objective: subjugating Ukraine”
Donald Jensen, director of Russia and Europe at the United States Institute of Peace
In this sense, Donald Jensen, director of Russia and Europe at the United States Institute of Peace, stated that “there is little chance that the talks will lead to an agreement, largely because the Kremlin has shown no sign of being willing to give in on its main objective: subjugating Ukraine.”
Thus, if the Russian position does not change, any agreement It will depend on one of the parties modifying their conditions or that international pressure alters the current balance on the battlefield and at the negotiating tables.