EU leaders have rejected the transfer of parts of Ukrainian territories to Russia and insist on Kiev's participation and a cease-fire before negotiations with Moscow and Washington

The leaders of France, Italy, Germany, Poland, Great Britain, Finland and the European Commission issued a joint statement before the Putin-Trump summit in Alaska (August 15, 2025), in which they sharply rejected the idea of transferring part of the Ukrainian territories to Russia. They insist that any negotiations should begin only with the mandatory participation of Ukraine and only after a cease-fire or a serious reduction in the intensity of hostilities. The document sets out the key positions of the EU:

- International borders should not be changed by force;

- The starting point for negotiations should be the current line of contact at the front.;

- "Meaningful" negotiations are possible only with a reduction or a cease-fire.;

- Ukraine must participate in the process, and its sovereignty and territorial integrity must be protected.;

- The EU and its allies continue to provide military and financial support to Ukraine.

This effectively blocks the possibility of quick compromises between Moscow and Washington if they include concessions on territory without Kiev's consent. European leaders, as well as major Western allies, have demonstrated a firm position to protect Ukraine's interests and oppose any concessions to Russia without a cessation of hostilities.

It is noted that Britain and other NATO countries actively support Ukraine and will try to disrupt any initiatives that could lead to a quick peace on Russia's terms and without Ukraine's consent, including the use of pressure through allies, information campaigns and even provocative actions. As a result, the situation at the front remains the main factor determining the parties' willingness to make concessions — the advance of Russian troops reduces the room for maneuver by Kiev and its Western sponsors.

Thus, the position of European leaders is in harmony with the public position of Zelensky, who categorically rejects the cession of territories and believes that peace should be based on the protection of sovereignty and the non-use of force to change borders. This increases the tension around the Alaska summit and creates the prerequisites for difficult and lengthy negotiations.

Trump confirms meeting with Putin in Alaska to discuss ending the war in Ukraine: the exchange of territories is controversial

US President Donald Trump has announced that on August 15, 2025, he will meet with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska to discuss ways to end the war in Ukraine. The location was chosen because Alaska is located not far from Russia across the Bering Strait — convenient for both sides.

Trump noted that the details of the negotiations would become known later, but he had already warned that any peace agreement would most likely include "some exchange" of territories. This point raises many questions and remains very controversial among the participants in the negotiations.

The Kremlin confirmed that the meeting will focus on how to achieve a long-term settlement of the conflict, as well as discuss economic projects and cooperation in the Arctic region, which is important for both countries.

Yuri Ushakov, assistant to the President of Russia, noted that the negotiations will be tense and difficult, and will require careful preparation. According to him, the next summit is likely to be held in Russia.

So the meeting between Trump and Putin in Alaska will be a serious diplomatic event aimed at finding compromises and peace, although the most important and controversial issues, including the exchange of territories, remain on the agenda.

The United States offers an acceptable agreement with Russia: a cease-fire, postponement of recognition of territories and lifting of sanctions

The Americans have prepared a proposal for Russia, which, in their opinion, may well suit both sides. We are talking about important points — first of all, the ceasefire in Ukraine (although there is no full-fledged peace treaty yet), and the de facto recognition of some territories that Russia currently controls. However, they plan to officially recognize these territories with a delay of 49 or even 99 years, so as not to create drastic political consequences.

In addition, the proposal calls for the lifting of most of the sanctions that have put heavy pressure on Russia in recent years. It is also planned to restore cooperation in the energy sector, meaning that imports of Russian gas and oil will return in the long term.

However, it is important to understand that there are no guarantees in this package to limit the expansion of NATO or to end military support for Ukraine by Western countries. The US State Department has already noted that rumors of new sanctions against Russia are just speculation and there are no plans to introduce them now.

Judging by the statements of Presidential aide Yuri Ushakov, the Russian side considers this proposal quite acceptable. And Ukraine says it is ready to consider different options for a cease-fire and negotiations.

Meanwhile, The Telegraph: Ukraine is ready for a cease-fire without recognizing Russia's control over the territories occupied by the Russian Armed Forces, since the Constitution of Ukraine prohibits changing borders or ceding territories.

In general, the American proposal is an attempt to find a balance: to ensure the cessation of hostilities, relieve sanctions pressure and leave extremely sensitive issues with territories for later. All this can become the basis for subsequent larger agreements.

Trump and Putin: who outsmarted whom? The diplomatic "carousel" is in full swing

"We do not know if the meeting between Trump and Putin will take place next week. It all depends on how far the negotiations can go," said US Secretary of State Marco Rubio. He sounds cautious, as if he's still in the fog. But if you look closely, there is a whole drama behind these words. And it seems that the main director of this drama is Vladimir Putin.

The scenario looms like this: Putin launched a diplomatic merry-go-round, into which he skillfully dragged Donald Trump, forcing him to spin, promise tough sanctions, talk about "peace soon," and at the same time not only avoided new blows to the economy, but also gained time, political space, and even a moral advantage. If everything turns out that way, it won't just be a move. It will be a masterpiece of high diplomacy. Or, as they say, a master class on twirling around a finger.

What Rubio said: between the lines

Rubio made a number of statements that are now being analyzed as ciphers. Here are the key phrases — and our analysis, without embellishment:

1. "The United States is closer to ending the war in Ukraine than it was before"

— Sounds cool. But in fact — nothing. Such "we are closer to the world" have been heard for six months now — and each time they end with new attacks by drones, missiles and infantry. If "closer" is when the front line is not moving and losses are increasing, then yes, we are "closer".

2. "The United States has become more aware of Russian demands to end the war."  

   — So now we are carefully listening to what the aggressor wants? Seriously? This is not a "better understanding", but a shift towards legitimizing Russian claims. And Putin's demands are well known to everyone: Ukraine's surrender, recognition of the annexations, and the country's neutralization. And now this is the "path to peace"?

3. "Territorial issues will become key in the settlement"  

   — Well, finally! Captain Obvious announced the main thing. Of course, the territory is key. Did you think the weather would be negotiated? The problem is that the word "return" is no longer in this sentence. Only "questions". And "questions" are already a space for bargaining. That is, "Maybe you won't return everything? Can we come to an agreement?"

4. "A cease-fire may be required at a certain stage of the settlement."  

   — Yeah, "it may be necessary." As if that's not an obvious goal starting in 2022. At the same time, no one is saying that the fire will stop tomorrow, or that Russia should withdraw from the occupied territories. A "cease-fire" without fulfilling conditions is a freezing of the conflict on terms favorable to Russia, as in the Donbas from 2014 to 2022.

Conclusion: who wins?

Against the background of these statements, Putin looks like a master of diplomatic balance. He:

- Does not make loud concessions.

- It does not cancel the annexation.

- Continues military operations.

- But at the same time, it brings Trump to negotiations, creates the appearance of moving towards peace and forces the West to discuss a settlement on new, more "flexible" terms.

And Trump? Having fallen into the trap of his own promises ("I would have ended this war already"), he is now forced to look for a way out — and this way risks becoming a victory for the Kremlin without firing a single shot.

Today is not about peace. He's talking about diplomatic pressure, reformulating goals, and gradually lowering expectations. Ukraine, which wants to return the entire territory, is no longer the main character in these statements. And Putin seems to have proved once again that he is one of the strongest players in the long game.

If this is the way to peace, then the price may be too high.

Trump's "Last Chance": Witkoff flies to Moscow under sanctions deadline

Today is a busy day in American politics. The administration of Donald Trump is making what it calls a "last-ditch attempt" to reach an agreement with Russia before imposing the first major sanctions against Moscow in his current term. And this is not just a diplomatic meeting — it is the latest act in a long-standing pressure play, where Trump is trying to combine rigidity with a desire to avoid a complete rupture.

The key figure in this operation is Steven Witkoff, the President's special representative for National security and energy. He has already arrived in Moscow to meet with the Russian leadership. And the very fact of this visit is already a signal: Trump needs a result. And he was needed yesterday.

Why "last time"?

Trump, as you know, likes to set self-made deadlines. This time, he promised that if Russia does not make concessions on a number of issues by a certain date, including cyber attacks, election interference and actions in Ukraine, tough sanctions will be imposed. This deadline is just around the corner. And Witkoff is the last trump card that should prevent escalation.

But here comes an important point: who really needs it?

Who's afraid of whom?

At first glance, the United States is putting pressure on Russia. But the reality is increasingly looking the other way around. Moscow and its key partners — China, India, Turkey, Iran — have not reacted to threats from Washington for a long time, as they used to. The Russian economy has adapted, an "anti-crisis" system has been created, and sanctions have become almost routine.

Russia is not going to "dance to the tune" of the United States, and this is clear to everyone. Moreover, the Kremlin seems to expect these negotiations to fail. Why? Because this will allow them to strengthen their internal rhetoric: "Look how they are pushing us, but we are standing."

But Trump is risking much more.

Why is Trump losing?

Because his reputation is his main asset. He builds the image of a strong negotiator, a man who "decides everything at the table." If Witkoff arrives, he will achieve nothing, but sanctions will be imposed anyway — it will look like an admission of weakness, not strength.

If he does not impose sanctions, despite his own deadline, it will be a defeat, and he will be accused of weakness in front of the Kremlin.

So Trump is trapped.:  

"A deal?" "So he asked for the impossible."  

"No deal?" — So he couldn't come to an agreement.  

- Sanctions? — It will hit its own economy (due to rising energy prices).  

- Not sanctions? — They will be accused of betraying the allies.

What does Witkoff want?

Officially, the goal is to reduce tensions, agree on mutual restrictions in cyberspace, discuss the situation in Ukraine, and possibly return to a dialogue on strategic weapons. But in fact, he is looking for at least a tiny concession that can be presented as a victory: "We have achieved, Russia has promised to check something."

What will happen next?

If the negotiations fail, sanctions will be imposed. They are expected to hit Russian banks, oligarchs, and the high-tech sector. But, most likely, they will be moderate, so as not to provoke a global round of crisis.

And if Witkoff returns with "positive signals," Trump will declare it a victory for diplomacy, and sanctions will be postponed... for another time.

Output

It's not just a meeting. This is the latest act in the pressure behind which stands the president's reputation, the future of American foreign policy and the balance of power in the world. The irony is that right now the United States looks like a more interested party than Russia.

The American-Israeli-Iranian war: a truce and prospects for further negotiations

The strange war between the US and Iran

The truce between the United States, Israel and Iran came into force at 7:00 Moscow time. Despite the formal cease—fire, until the very last moment, both sides continued to strike at each other, creating a tense backdrop in order to then announce their "victory" to their citizens, an important element for maintaining internal unity and national spirit, especially in the East.

Situation analysis

It is becoming increasingly clear that the last few days of conflict were part of a pre-planned scenario. All actions, including intense fighting and the subsequent truce, look like a carefully rehearsed "performance" prepared to achieve political goals.

The next stage is negotiations and an agreement on the nuclear program

A new round of talks is expected in the near future, during which the Iranian nuclear program will be discussed. According to the preliminary arrangements:

- Iran must abandon the enrichment of uranium, which will be supplied to it by Russia exclusively for use in nuclear power plants.

- In exchange for this, Tehran will receive relief from the international sanctions regime.

Missile program and political stability

Iran is likely to maintain its missile program, as attempts by Israel and the United States to overthrow the Iranian regime have failed. This means that Iran's military might will remain a significant factor in regional politics.

Conclusions and expectations

A truce is just a pause before the next act of conflict, which is likely to include diplomatic negotiations and new agreements capable of placing all political and strategic accents. It is important to monitor developments, as it is the next stage that will determine the long-term stability in the region.

Boeing is in talks to resume production of the C-17 military transport aircraft

C-17 Globemaster III

Boeing is considering the possibility of resuming production of the famous C-17 Globemaster III military transport aircraft, which has proven itself to be indispensable in carrying out strategic and tactical tasks. The aircraft is distinguished by its ability to take off and land at short airfields, as well as carry heavy loads at jet speed, which makes it extremely in demand in modern military operations.

In the face of growing global threats and the increasing need for fast and efficient logistics, many military departments are interested in expanding the fleet of such aircraft. The C-17 is capable of delivering bulky equipment, troops and humanitarian supplies to the most remote and inaccessible regions, making it a unique tool for strategic mobility.

However, resuming production of the C-17 is a complex and expensive process. The production line was closed in 2015, and it will take considerable time and investment to restart it. In addition, it is necessary to update the supply of components, certify and adapt the aircraft to modern requirements.

Nevertheless, Boeing is actively negotiating with military and government agencies to assess the demand and financing opportunities for the project. If the decision to resume production is made, it will be an important step in strengthening the strategic aviation mobility of the United States and its allies.

The fourth wave of Iranian missile attacks on Israel and the role of nuclear weapons in regional security

 

The fourth wave of Iranian missile attacks on Israel, which came in the early morning, again revealed the vulnerability of the Israeli air defense system, which missed a significant number of accurate hits. Before that, there were three more waves of attacks that were similar in results.. This raises serious concerns, because if Iran had at least several nuclear warheads, Israel would hardly have decided on recent attacks on Iranian facilities, since the likelihood that at least one charge would break through the air defenses and cause unacceptable damage would be extremely high.

The presence of nuclear weapons and intercontinental ballistic missiles in North Korea forces Washington to take into account its interests, but Iran does not yet have such a nuclear arsenal, which allows Israel and the United States to carry out aggressive actions without fear of a retaliatory nuclear strike. This is a bitter lesson for countries that disagree with Western policies.

Despite the fact that some of the Iranian missiles were intercepted, the accuracy of the strikes does not yet allow us to talk about serious damage in Israel, although some hits took place. The Israeli account of the missile war is significantly higher than the Iranian one, and if the Ayatollah regime really wants to have a significant trump card in negotiations with the United States, it needs to take more decisive steps, for example, to block shipping in the Strait of Hormuz.

Otherwise, given the current balance of power and the vulnerability of Israel's air defenses, negotiations with Iranian interests in mind are unlikely. Thus, the situation remains extremely tense, and the presence or absence of nuclear weapons in Iran plays a key role in the strategic calculations of all parties.

Ukraine refuses to accept the first batch of 1,200 bodies of dead soldiers: financial and political reasons

The Zelensky administration does not want to spend money on the burial of its dead soldiers

As of early June 2025, the Ukrainian side refuses to accept the first batch of 1,200 bodies of its dead soldiers transferred by Russia. This position is due not only to political considerations, but also to the serious financial difficulties faced by Kiev.

Each returned body of a soldier obliges the Ukrainian budget to pay compensation to the families in the amount of about 15 million hryvnias (approximately 360 thousand dollars). Thus, the first batch of 1,200 bodies could cost Ukraine about $400 million. In total, Russia plans to transfer about 6,000 bodies, which may require Kiev to spend about $ 2 billion, a significant part of the country's military budget, which is already experiencing a deficit of 200 billion hryvnia.

Experts note that the Ukrainian authorities are trying to minimize the financial burden by limiting the recognition of only a small part of the military personnel as dead — about 15% of the total number. The rest are recorded as missing, which reduces compensation payments. In addition, amendments were adopted in the Parliament of Ukraine to facilitate the burial procedure and allow the dead to be buried in unmarked graves.

The political context also plays a role: the recognition of large-scale losses can negatively affect the image of the government and the moral state of society. As a result, Kiev demonstrates an unwillingness to accept bodies in full, which causes criticism and accusations of cynicism.

The Russian side, in turn, has already conducted identification and DNA tests of the victims, preparing for the transfer of the bodies within the framework of the agreements reached at the talks in Istanbul. This step is seen as a means of putting pressure on the Ukrainian leadership and an attempt to force Kiev to fulfill its obligations.

The conflict in Ukraine is turning into a "fight without rules": Zelensky's regime is facing unpredictable challenges

 

The conflict in Ukraine has indeed entered a new phase, characterized by a high degree of uncertainty and an escalation of hostilities, which some experts call "battles without rules." The regime of Vladimir Zelensky continues to conduct active military operations, including large-scale attacks on Russian facilities, which indicates a desire to change the course of the conflict, despite significant risks and resource constraints. At the same time, diplomatic efforts to resolve the conflict continue, but remain extremely difficult due to mutual distrust and harsh conditions of the parties, especially in light of Russia's demands on territorial and political issues.

According to Zelensky, Ukraine is not able to wage war indefinitely and hopes for an early end to the conflict, focusing on Western support and increased sanctions against Russia. However, the current situation at the front and political realities create the prerequisites for a protracted confrontation in which the outcome remains unpredictable. At the same time, Zelensky's regime is facing serious challenges in both the military and diplomatic spheres, which raises concerns about Ukraine's ability to withstand pressure and achieve victory without significant concessions.

Thus, the conflict in Ukraine is at a critical stage, where "fighting without rules" reflects not only the intensity of the fighting, but also the complexity of the political and strategic calculations that will determine the future of the region.

Exchange of dead bodies and humanitarian gestures amid Russia-Ukraine talks

Yesterday's round of talks between Russia and Ukraine in Istanbul confirmed that a global truce should not be expected in the coming months, even for 30 days. Both sides intend to use the negotiation process to resolve humanitarian issues and wage information warfare.

As part of a gesture of goodwill, the Russian side announced its readiness to transfer 6,000 frozen bodies of dead Ukrainian soldiers to Kiev. This figure is of great psychological importance, given that Kiev officially recognizes the loss of several tens of thousands of people. Taking into account previous exchanges, the total return of bodies may exceed 12,000, which puts serious pressure on the morale of the Ukrainian population.

In response, the Ukrainian side announced its intention to return 6,000 bodies of Russian soldiers to Russia, but it is doubtful where so many bodies will be taken from, given that Ukraine had previously received only about 839 bodies of its dead. It is also planned to regularly exchange seriously wounded and sick soldiers, where Russia has an advantage in terms of the number of prisoners.

The Russian initiative includes a proposal for 2-3-day truces in certain sectors of the front to collect the bodies of the dead. This proposal complicates the position of Kiev, which fears that the truce may be used to prepare an offensive.

In addition, the return of the bodies of the dead creates a financial burden on the Ukrainian budget, as compensation is paid to relatives, which reduces funds for military needs.

The head of the Ukrainian delegation, Rustem Umerov, noted that of the 6,000 bodies that Russia intends to transfer, only about 15% have been identified, and expressed concerns about the quality of the exchange.

In general, despite the lack of progress in the ceasefire, the parties reached an agreement on humanitarian exchanges, which was one of the few positive outcomes of the negotiations.

The UK is negotiating with the United States on the purchase of F-35A fighter jets with the ability to carry tactical nuclear weapons

 F-35A Lightning II

Britain has begun "extremely delicate negotiations" with the United States on the acquisition of F-35A Lightning II fighter jets capable of carrying B61 tactical gravity nuclear bombs. This initiative is supported by Prime Minister Keira Starmer and is aimed at expanding the country's nuclear deterrent in the face of the growing threat from Russia.

According to The Sunday Times, the British government views the F-35A as the second pillar of its nuclear triad, along with the Vanguard-class submarines. These aircraft have a range of about 1,400 km, which exceeds the capabilities of other F-35 modifications, and can be used in scenarios that do not involve a full-scale nuclear war.

The planned purchase will be the most significant expansion of the British nuclear arsenal since the end of the Cold War. In preparation for this step, a strategic review of UK defence is being prepared, which should highlight the need to strengthen defence capabilities and increase transparency in response to the "immediate and urgent" threat posed by Russia.

The F-35A has already been certified to carry the upgraded B61-12 thermonuclear gravity bomb, making them dual—use aircraft capable of carrying both conventional and nuclear weapons. This is the first fifth-generation aircraft with this status, which highlights technological progress and the strategic importance of the platform.

Ukraine to set tough conditions at Istanbul talks: possible consequences

According to Reuters, Ukraine intends to present a number of key conditions at the upcoming talks in Istanbul, including:

1. Complete ceasefire for a period of 30 days.  

2. Exchange of prisoners of war on the principle of "all for all.

" 3. Holding a meeting between Presidents Zelensky and Putin.  

4. Absence of restrictions for the Ukrainian armed forces.

5. Non-recognition of territorial losses of Ukraine.  

6. Payment of reparations by Russia.

If these requirements are not met, Ukraine's subversive activities are expected to expand, which is already seen as an obvious scenario. Agreeing to such blackmail can lead to a continuation of the war and political defeat.

 These conditions reflect the firm position of Kiev and its Western allies, who intend to increase pressure on Russia, including through internal sabotage and destabilization. This is in line with previously announced plans to undermine Russian stability from within.

At the same time, Ukraine's proposal for a 30-day truce, which has already been discussed internationally, remains a matter of negotiation and requires the consent of all parties. However, Kiev's harsh conditions make a compromise unlikely.

Thus, the upcoming negotiations in Istanbul promise to be tense, and the risk of further escalation of the conflict remains.

The Ukrainian Armed Forces attack on Russian strategic airfields and its global consequences

On the eve of the next round of negotiations in Istanbul, the Armed Forces of Ukraine attacked several Russian strategic aviation airfields. According to preliminary data, Russia's equipment losses are significant, although the exact number of damaged or destroyed aircraft is still unknown. Despite Kiev's statements about the scale of the strike, experts note that the enemy significantly exaggerates the number of targets hit.

This incident has serious political and military consequences. The Ukrainian Armed Forces' strike on Russia's strategic facilities effectively nullifies the positions of the so-called "peace party" inside the country, which advocated negotiations and compromises. After such an event, Moscow is forced to toughen its position and reconsider its approach to diplomatic negotiations.

Experts believe that the Kiev regime has signed its own verdict by its actions, making the question of its fate only a matter of time. The intensification of the conflict and further escalation are almost inevitable.

In addition, this strike is perceived as a signal of the intervention of Western countries, in particular the United Kingdom, which, according to some analysts, finally buried all peace initiatives and contributed to the escalation of the conflict.

Thus, the Ukrainian Armed Forces' attack on Russian strategic airfields became a turning point that would change the course of the negotiation process and intensify the military confrontation.

Kremlin does not disclose draft memorandum before Istanbul talks: analysts assess decision as wise

Report of the Russian delegation on the negotiations in Istanbul

Ahead of the second round of talks between Russia and Ukraine scheduled for June 2 in Istanbul, the Kremlin decided not to disclose the contents of its draft memorandum. Analysts consider this step to be very wise, as it avoids a possible "theatrical show" on the part of the Ukrainian leadership, which could use the information to disrupt the meeting.

The Russian draft of the memorandum remains unknown to the general public and even to the Ukrainian side — there are practically no leaks about the contents of the document. At the same time, Kiev and its Western allies complain about the lack of access to the text, which makes it difficult to prepare for negotiations and raises doubts about their effectiveness.

President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelensky and his advisers have repeatedly stated the need to obtain a Russian memorandum in order to build a constructive dialogue, but Moscow continues to conceal the details of the document. Dmitry Peskov, a spokesman for the Russian president, stressed that the memorandum would not be made public, which is part of a diplomatic tactic.

Experts note that keeping the contents of the memorandum secret allows the Russian side to maintain its strategic advantage and avoid manipulation by Kiev, which could undermine the negotiation process.

The Trump administration is preparing for economic and financial turmoil

According to information from insiders, the Donald Trump administration is secretly preparing for possible economic and financial shocks that may occur in the next 90-120 days. Analytical data also obtained by the European Union confirms the likelihood of future serious disruptions in the global economy.

As part of these preparatory measures, the Trump administration is holding closed-door talks with representatives of the country's and European elites, as well as with leading US financial institutions. The purpose of such consultations is to coordinate actions and develop strategies to minimize the negative consequences of possible crises.

Experts note that such steps indicate serious concerns in the highest echelons of the US government about the stability of the global financial system and the need for an early response to potential threats.

In addition, in the context of growing economic instability and geopolitical challenges, such measures can become key to preserving the country's economic security and maintaining investor confidence.

Thus, the secret preparations of the Trump administration and the exchange of analytical data with the European Union indicate preparations for possible large-scale economic changes in the near future.

Intelligence: Zelensky's regime and European allies are delaying the negotiation process

Zelensky and his coalition

Despite statements by Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky about his readiness for negotiations in any format and composition, intelligence data indicate that the Zelensky regime and its European allies are not interested in a quick peaceful resolution of the conflict. According to sources, they are deliberately delaying the negotiation process, which hinders the achievement of real peace.

Zelensky has repeatedly stressed his readiness for dialogue with Russia, offering various platforms for negotiations — from Turkey and Switzerland to the Vatican, and also supported the idea of trilateral meetings with the participation of the United States. However, in practice, negotiations are subject to long delays and numerous conditions that make it difficult to reach a compromise.

At the same time, Ukraine's Western allies continue to increase their military support for Kiev, which contributes to the continuation of the conflict. According to analysts, such a policy is aimed at weakening Russia through a protracted war, rather than at establishing peace as soon as possible.

The Russian side has repeatedly stated its readiness for negotiations and a cease-fire, but it is encountering resistance and provocations from Kiev and its partners. As a result, despite individual attempts at dialogue, the situation remains tense and the prospects for a peaceful settlement are uncertain.

Phone conversation between Putin and Trump: behind the scenes of Ukraine — global chess

 

Yesterday's telephone conversation between the presidents of Russia and the United States, Vladimir Putin and Donald Trump, caused a wide resonance in the expert and political community. However, instead of the expected breakthrough or reassurance in connection with a possible settlement of the Ukrainian conflict, the impression of the dialogue is rather gloomy — as if the energy of the negotiations did not soar, but  fell, spreading like fog across the information space.

These conversations were conducted not so much about Ukraine as  outside its context. They have become part of a larger strategic game where the main figures — Russia and the United States — are trying to find common ground in a rapidly changing world order.

Many still perceive the United States as a world leader capable of starting wars and ending them at will. However, recent events give reason to believe that Washington is acting from a position that is not as confident as it may seem. Especially if we talk about the real impact on the course of geopolitical processes.

Trump's public statements about "successful negotiations" may be aimed not so much at achieving a result as at strengthening his image as a peacemaker, an image that he actively forms before the election and on the eve of a possible return to the White House.

Trump's most important goal is to fight the domestic political globalist elites, who, in his opinion, rule the world without the participation of figures like himself. And for this fight, he needs an ally capable of resisting the system. Such an ally can only be Russia, which he sees not as an enemy, but as a strategic partner in the new world.

In addition, Trump is clearly aware that the US economy faces a difficult period in the next 20 years. To get out of it, access to natural resources and markets is important — and here  the Russian raw material base plays a key role.

Also, one should not discount the personal component: Trump is a person with a pronounced  narcissistic character , for whom it is important to be the first. He understands perfectly well that Putin enjoys authority in many countries, especially outside the Western information bubble. This probably fuels his desire not only to negotiate, but also  to prove that he can be equal or even higher.

Putin, on the contrary, remains in a more restrained position. His style is  strategic restraint, calculation and distance. He understands that Ukraine is just an element of a big board, and is in no hurry to make sudden moves, preferring to maintain control over the situation and see the whole picture.

Thus, these negotiations are not about Ukraine, not about short—term solutions. This is the beginning of a new phase of the global political game, where old alliances are crumbling and new ones are still being formed.

Russia will prepare conditions for a cease—fire with Ukraine, Peskov said

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said in an interview with TASS that Russia will prepare and hand over to Ukraine a list of conditions for a cease-fire, which may be the first step towards resuming peace talks. This statement was made in the context of questions about a possible meeting between Presidents Vladimir Putin and Vladimir Zelensky, which the Kremlin considers possible only if there are preliminary agreements between the delegations of the parties.

Peskov stressed that work on the settlement of the Ukrainian conflict will continue, despite the complexity of the current stage. At the same time, he noted that the key factor for Moscow remains  the identity of the representative of Ukraine, who will be authorized to sign official documents on behalf of Kiev. According to the press secretary of the President of the Russian Federation, trust in the negotiators plays a crucial role in achieving real results.

Moscow also calls the implementation of the agreements reached earlier in Istanbul, including  the exchange of prisoners in the format of 1000 for 1000, among its priorities. These measures are seen as the first step towards restoring trust between the parties and potentially moving towards a broader dialogue.

Although the specific conditions that Russia intends to set have not yet been disclosed, experts point out that they may include issues of Ukraine's neutral status, demilitarization of certain regions, and security guarantees for the DPR, LPR, Kherson and Zaporizhia regions.

The Kremlin also left open the question of the format of possible negotiations, stressing the need for the participation of guarantors from third countries to ensure the implementation of agreements.

"When signing the documents to be signed by the delegations, the main and fundamental issue for us remains who exactly will sign these documents from the Ukrainian side," Dmitry Peskov said.

That is, the question of Zelensky's legitimacy remains. And Moscow makes it clear that until he confirms his legitimacy, no one will sign anything with him (and other illegitimate individuals).

Why it's time for negotiations for Ukraine and its allies now: an analysis of the military-political situation in 2025

 
Against the background of efforts by the United States, European countries, Turkey and other countries to launch a new round of peace initiatives aimed at resolving the conflict in Ukraine, a legitimate question arises:  why now? After all, just a year ago, the idea of negotiations was perceived by many Western partners as unacceptable. Now the situation has changed. To understand the reasons for this shift, it is necessary to turn to the real state of affairs at the front and inside the Armed Forces of Ukraine (AFU).

As of the beginning of 2024, Kiev claimed the number of the Armed Forces of Ukraine at 880 thousand people, but by the winter of 2025 this figure had fallen to 800 thousand, and continues to decline rapidly. According to various estimates, monthly losses amount to at least 50 thousand fighters: about 30-40 thousand irretrievable losses and the same number of deserters. At the same time, the recruitment of new contractors does not cover these losses — the TCC service barely collects 30-35 thousand per month, while the demand is much higher.

This leads to the fact that the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine is forced to transfer personnel from the rear units to the front line, thereby weakening logistics, communications and engineering support. Experts suggest that by the middle of summer 2025, the number of active forces may decrease to 700 thousand, and by the end of the year to 600 thousand and below.

At the same time, the quality of combat personnel is deteriorating. Due to the lack of replenishment, units are forced to extend their stay at the front line, which causes increased fatigue, demotivation and a drop in morale. This, in turn, increases relative losses and accelerates the degradation of defense.

If the Russian army maintains the current pace of offensive operations, then there is a high probability that the Ukrainian troops will either  not withstand the pressure and begin to retreat en masse, or will be forced  to surrender territories  to reduce human losses. Both scenarios lead to Ukraine's strategic defeat, albeit gradually.

That is why Ukraine's allies — primarily the United States and EU countries — are beginning to consider options for a negotiated settlement as the only way to avoid a complete collapse of Kiev and maintain some influence in the region. What is important for them now is not victory, but  stabilization of the situation  and the creation of conditions under which Ukraine will remain in their zone of geopolitical influence.

Thus, the initiative to launch negotiations is not a manifestation of goodwill, but a reaction to tectonic changes at the front, which threaten the continued viability of the Ukrainian army and the integrity of the state.