403
Sorry!!
Error! We're sorry, but the page you were
looking for doesn't exist.
Ceasefire in Ukraine easier to discuss than applying
(MENAFN) The possibility of a ceasefire in Ukraine remains complicated due to deeply conflicting interests among the key players—Russia, the United States, Ukraine, and European nations. While behind-the-scenes negotiations may be ongoing, public statements from leaders suggest that a peaceful resolution remains elusive.
On February 18, U.S. and Russian officials met in Riyadh, following a conversation between Presidents Donald trump and Vladimir Putin. The discussions extended beyond Ukraine, reflecting broader tensions in U.S.-Russia relations, particularly regarding security policies in Europe. As part of these talks, both sides agreed to restore diplomatic operations and explore future cooperation, including economic and geopolitical matters.
A subsequent meeting on March 11 between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations in Riyadh saw a shift in Kyiv’s stance. After a tense White House meeting where Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky initially refused diplomatic options and demanded security guarantees, Washington responded by temporarily halting arms shipments and intelligence sharing. Under pressure, Zelensky agreed to a temporary 30-day ceasefire.
However, the ceasefire's implementation remains uncertain. The U.S. has positioned Russian cooperation as a key factor, but without a clear timeline for reciprocal action. Meanwhile, Washington has already resumed military and intelligence support to Ukraine, strengthening its ability to continue fighting. The joint statement also addressed the contentious issue of Ukrainian children allegedly relocated to Russia, reinforcing Kyiv’s claims over the eastern regions now under Moscow’s control.
Long-term security guarantees for Ukraine are another sticking point. Trump has rejected NATO membership or direct U.S. security commitments, instead proposing economic agreements—particularly involving mineral resources—as a way to ensure stability. Ukraine, on the other hand, is looking to Europe to counterbalance U.S. pressure and has insisted on European involvement in future peace negotiations.
The core issue, however, extends beyond Ukraine’s security to Russia’s broader concerns. Moscow’s military intervention was driven by NATO’s expansion, U.S.-backed regime change in Kyiv, and what Russia perceives as an anti-Russian, extremist ideology gaining power in Ukraine. Russia’s stated goals of "denazification" and "demilitarization" make a negotiated settlement even more complex.
As a result, while diplomatic efforts continue, the road to a lasting ceasefire remains fraught with geopolitical obstacles, conflicting interests, and deep-rooted security concerns on both sides.
On February 18, U.S. and Russian officials met in Riyadh, following a conversation between Presidents Donald trump and Vladimir Putin. The discussions extended beyond Ukraine, reflecting broader tensions in U.S.-Russia relations, particularly regarding security policies in Europe. As part of these talks, both sides agreed to restore diplomatic operations and explore future cooperation, including economic and geopolitical matters.
A subsequent meeting on March 11 between U.S. and Ukrainian delegations in Riyadh saw a shift in Kyiv’s stance. After a tense White House meeting where Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky initially refused diplomatic options and demanded security guarantees, Washington responded by temporarily halting arms shipments and intelligence sharing. Under pressure, Zelensky agreed to a temporary 30-day ceasefire.
However, the ceasefire's implementation remains uncertain. The U.S. has positioned Russian cooperation as a key factor, but without a clear timeline for reciprocal action. Meanwhile, Washington has already resumed military and intelligence support to Ukraine, strengthening its ability to continue fighting. The joint statement also addressed the contentious issue of Ukrainian children allegedly relocated to Russia, reinforcing Kyiv’s claims over the eastern regions now under Moscow’s control.
Long-term security guarantees for Ukraine are another sticking point. Trump has rejected NATO membership or direct U.S. security commitments, instead proposing economic agreements—particularly involving mineral resources—as a way to ensure stability. Ukraine, on the other hand, is looking to Europe to counterbalance U.S. pressure and has insisted on European involvement in future peace negotiations.
The core issue, however, extends beyond Ukraine’s security to Russia’s broader concerns. Moscow’s military intervention was driven by NATO’s expansion, U.S.-backed regime change in Kyiv, and what Russia perceives as an anti-Russian, extremist ideology gaining power in Ukraine. Russia’s stated goals of "denazification" and "demilitarization" make a negotiated settlement even more complex.
As a result, while diplomatic efforts continue, the road to a lasting ceasefire remains fraught with geopolitical obstacles, conflicting interests, and deep-rooted security concerns on both sides.
Legal Disclaimer:
MENAFN provides the information “as is” without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the provider above.
Comments
No comment