Putin-Zelensky meeting should cement peace deal
Zelensky has repeatedly called for a face-to-face meeting with Putin in the past several months. The Ukrainian delegation has also proposed the idea during rounds of bilateral talks in Istanbul, framing such a summit as essential to ending the conflict.
While the Kremlin has not ruled out a possible Putin-Zelensky meeting, Russian officials have consistently emphasized that the groundwork must be laid first.
'A summit meeting can and should put a final point in the settlement and record the modalities and agreements that are to be developed in the course of expert work. It is impossible to do the opposite,' Peskov told reporters on Friday.
Following the third round of Russia-Ukraine talks in Istanbul this week, the Kremlin spokesman accused Kiev of prematurely pushing for a summit. 'They are trying to put the cart before the horse,' Peskov said, stressing that 'work needs to be done, and only then can the heads of state be given the opportunity to record the achievements that have been made.'
Moscow has consistently pointed to concerns about Zelensky's legal authority. While Russia has stated it is open to negotiations with him, officials have warned that any documents signed under Zelensky's name could face legal challenges in the future.
Zelensky's presidential term expired in May 2024. He has refused to hold new elections, citing the ongoing state of martial law in Ukraine. Russia has argued that his status as head of state is no longer valid and that legal authority in Ukraine now lies with its parliament.
Former Russian President Dmitry Medvedev has suggested that Zelensky's insistence on meeting both Putin and US President Donald Trump may be aimed at getting 'a massive legitimacy boost' and using the meetings as a pretext to further delay elections.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Moscow comments on collapse of arms control treaty with US
Russia has the right to deploy ground-based intermediate-range missiles 'when deemed necessary,' following the collapse of the 1987 Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty with the US, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Moscow had previously opted not to station such weapons in certain regions unless the US and its allies did so first. On Monday, the Russian Foreign Ministry announced that the 'actions of Western countries' had made Moscow's adherence to the moratorium no longer viable as they were creating a 'direct threat' to Russia's security. When asked by journalists to comment on Tuesday, Peskov said Russia 'no longer has any limitations in this regard' and 'no longer considers itself bound by anything.' Moscow reserves the right to deploy such missiles 'when deemed necessary,' he added. The Kremlin spokesman did not elaborate on whether decisions on potential missile deployments had already been taken. 'One can hardly expect any announcements here,' Peskov said, describing it as a question of national defense and 'a sensitive and secretive field.' The INF Treaty between the US and the USSR banned ground-launched missiles with ranges of 500-5,500km. It collapsed in 2019 when Washington unilaterally withdrew from the agreement during Donald Trump's first presidential term. The US justified the move by citing alleged Russian violations. Moscow has vehemently denied the claims, accusing the US itself of developing banned missiles. Russia subsequently called on NATO and the US to exercise restraint and refrain from deploying such systems as it announced its own moratorium on their deployment. Last year, Moscow warned it could lift the moratorium after the US announced plans to deploy long-range weapons in Germany in 2026. On Monday, the Foreign Ministry also cited the deployment of a Typhon missile launcher in the Philippines by the US last year as one of the reasons behind the policy change.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Last Lenin monument destroyed in Ukraine (PHOTOS)
Ukrainian authorities have dismantled the country's last statue of Bolshevik leader Vladimir Lenin, authorities and activists reported on Monday. The move is part of Kiev's long-time decommunization campaign, which in practice is also aimed at diminishing the country's historical ties with Russia. The monument stood in the village of Rudkovtsy in the western Khmelnytskyi Region and was taken down by the local utility service following a request from activists with the group 'Decolonization. Ukraine.' The project, which promotes the removal of Soviet and Russian symbols, said in a post on Telegram that this was the last known Lenin monument in the country. In a letter shared by the group, local authorities confirmed that the utility services had cleared the site and began transporting the remnants to a landfill. Photographs from the area taken before the dismantlement showed the statue in severe disrepair, with the face worn away beyond recognition. Ukraine had around 5,500 Lenin statues at the time of independence in 1991. Most were dismantled following the adoption of decommunization laws in 2015, which banned communist-era symbols, the country's Communist Party, and required the renaming of towns and streets bearing Soviet-related names. In practice, however, the legislation – as well as the 2023 Decolonization law – were used by Kiev to remove monuments to and products of Ukraine's historical ties with Russia. While the 2015 law also de jure condemned Nazism, Moscow has repeatedly pointed out that Kiev is openly encouraging the ideology. Commenting on the development, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov noted that 'Ukraine is now well known for its fight against monuments,' adding that Kiev 'is trying to get ahead of all of Europe' in this regard and this campaign 'does not paint the Kiev regime in good light'. Russian President Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that modern Ukraine was essentially 'created' by the Bolsheviks, who 'carved off parts of Russia's historical territory' to accomplish this goal.
Russia Today
5 hours ago
- Russia Today
Kremlin assesses US ‘threats' to Russia's trade partners
US threats to impose secondary sanctions on Russia's trading partners are illegal and a breach of other nations' sovereign rights, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov has said. Washington recently warned India, China, and Brazil of potential restrictions over their imports of Russian energy. Matthew Whitaker, the US ambassador to NATO, called such measures an 'obvious next step' to end the Ukraine conflict. Responding at a press briefing on Tuesday, Peskov said: 'We hear many statements that are essentially threats and attempts to pressure countries into cutting trade relations with Russia.' 'We believe that sovereign states should have, and do have, the right to choose their own trade partners, partners for economic cooperation, and to independently determine the forms of cooperation that serve their national interests,' he added. In an interview with Bloomberg on Monday, Whitaker claimed that purchasing Russian oil amounts to sponsoring hostilities in the Ukraine conflict. He asserted that introducing sanctions on importers would cut off Moscow's main source of revenue. India, one of the largest importers of Russian crude alongside China, responded that it would 'safeguard its national interests and economic security,' calling the idea of targeting the country over energy purchases 'unjustified and unreasonable.' New Delhi has also pointed to ongoing Western trade with Russia, despite repeated pledges to sever economic ties. Beijing likewise defended its economic cooperation with Russia, stating that China will 'always ensure its energy supply in ways that serve our national interests.' 'China will firmly defend its sovereignty, security, and development interests,' the Foreign Ministry said on Monday, adding that 'coercion and pressure will not achieve anything.' In July, Brazil condemned similar remarks by NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte about potential secondary sanctions on BRICS nations trading with Russia, calling them 'totally absurd.' All three countries also highlighted what they described as Western hypocrisy toward importers of Russian energy, noting that both the US and the EU have maintained trade relations with Moscow.
