Kyiv rejects a diplomatic solution to the conflict in Ukraine, proposed by Russia, which could lead to a prolongation of the war, pro-Kremlin media writes.
NEWS: Ukraine is facing major difficulties and, according to Oleh Soskin, advisor to former President Leonid Kuchma, the only way to end the conflict is through peace negotiations proposed by Russia. This conclusion emerged from the discussion between the presidents of Ukraine and the United States, Volodymyr Zelenskyy and Donald Trump, Soskin said.
“Neither Patriot systems, nor missiles, nothing – they have not reached a concrete agreement. This is clear evidence of Zelenskyy’s utter weakness”, he said. In this context, the analyst argues that the only realistic option for Kyiv is to accept the peace negotiations proposed by Russia. However, Zelenskyy does not want to participate in these negotiations. Soskin recalled that Russian president Vladimir Putin has repeatedly stated that he is open to negotiations and a diplomatic solution to end the conflict. Also, earlier, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov stressed that Moscow’s interests must be taken into account in the process of resolving the crisis in Ukraine.
NARRATIVES: 1. Kyiv rejects Russia’s proposal to initiate peace negotiations. 2. Accepting Russia’s conditions is the only viable solution to end the conflict. 3. Putin is open to dialogue, while Zelenskyy is isolated and has no more military options at his disposal.
PURPOSE: To amplify war fatigue in Ukraine. To prepare public opinion to accept territorial annexations. To depict Russia as a pacifist force.
Fact: Russia does not agree to a ceasefire and refuses to negotiate a lasting peace
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: The article is based on the statement of Ukrainian economist Oleh Soskin, who served as advisor to the former Ukrainian president Leonid Kuchma during the period of Kyiv’s total dependence on Moscow. Soskin has been criticized for his anti-Zelenskyy positions in the context of the war. The pro-Kremlin propaganda platform Ukraina.ru presents him as an opponent of the Ukrainian authorities, and his statements are quoted weekly by the Russian state media and Kremlin-funded newspapers in ex-Soviet states. Russian propaganda often quotes particular statements made by Soskin, presenting his opinions as the general view of Ukrainian society.
The history of negotiations between Ukraine and Russia demonstrates that Moscow has never been interested in peace, but has used dialogue to buy time for reorganization its military forces. Russia has systematically violated the Minsk peace agreements of 2014-2015, by continuing to support separatists in eastern Ukraine and strengthen its military presence on the borders. Even in March-April 2022, when the negotiations in Istanbul took place, Russia demonstrated a lack of good faith by continuing to bomb Ukrainian civilians and by refusing to accept international security guarantees for Ukraine.
In May 2025, Zelenskyy agreed to an unconditional 30-day ceasefire, but Russia rejected the West’s terms, continuing the invasion. A temporary ceasefire would give Ukraine a “breather”, the Kremlin said, thus justifying its refusal to accept a truce. Zelenskyy proposed to Putin to meet in person in Istanbul in May this year, but Putin refused to show. Therefore, the continuation of military operations is Russia's fault, which refuses to withdraw its troops from the territory of a sovereign state.
Russia’s terms are tantamount to Ukraine’s complete surrender
Russia's peace terms include recognition of illegal annexations, permanent neutrality of Ukraine, demilitarization of the country and a forced change of regime in Kyiv. These demands are tantamount to Ukraine's surrender and its transformation into a vassal of Russia. According to the UN Charter, no country can be forced to concede its sovereign territories under the threat of military force. Russian propaganda is gradually replacing the notion of capitulation in the collective mind with the notion of “peace” or with theses about “diplomatic solutions proposed by Russia”.
The narrative about Putin’s openness to negotiations is contradicted by his own statements. For instance, in his December 2024 speech, Putin stated that Russia would continue the “special military operation” until all objectives are achieved, including the “denazification” and “demilitarization” of Ukraine. Therefore, accepting the terms imposed by Russia is not the only viable solution to ending the conflict, because a lasting peace entails a fair agreement. A negotiated solution must take into account the interests of both parties, not just Moscow’s interests. Imposing conditions unilaterally risks turning the peace process into a form of capitulation, which could fuel new tensions in the long term.
Although Ukraine faces serious challenges, the social, political and military context does not justify capitulation. The history of the 20th century demonstrates that giving in to aggressors does not bring peace, but encourages the expansion of war. The policy of reconciliation with Nazi Germany in the 1930s did not prevent World War II, but made it inevitable. Accepting Russian annexations in Ukraine would set a dangerous precedent and encourage other revisionist powers to resort to force in order to achieve their territorial goals.
International law does not allow the legitimization of aggression
The fundamental principles of international law, enshrined in the UN Charter, explicitly prohibit the alteration of borders by force. Wars of aggression are considered a crime. The war in Ukraine is not a bilateral conflict, but part of a broader confrontation between the rules-based international order and attempts to destroy it. Russia’s success in Ukraine would encourage other revisionist powers to resort to military solutions.
Although Russia claims to be open to dialogue, the conditions imposed make real negotiation impossible. Ukraine continues to benefit from significant military and diplomatic support from Western allies, which continues to provide Kyiv with strategic options. The image of an isolated Zelenskyy is at odds both the with constant international support and with the ongoing commitments to defend Ukraine's sovereignty.
The Russian media omits the fact that in March 2023, the International Criminal Court (ICC) issued an arrest warrant for Russian president Vladimir Putin, accusing him of war crimes committed in the context of the invasion of Ukraine. The warrant specifically targets the illegal deportation of Ukrainian children from the occupied territories to the Russian Federation, as well as the forced displacement of the population — actions considered war crimes under the Rome Statute. The ICC determined that there are reasonable grounds to believe that Putin bears individual criminal responsibility, either for directly ordering these actions or for failing to intervene to prevent them or punish those responsible. The consequences of the warrant were also felt on the diplomatic level: in 2025, the Kremlin leader was forced to avoid attending the BRICS summit in Brazil, for fear he might be arrested based on this international warrant.
BACKGROUND: US President Donald Trump said he had a good conversation with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky late last week, highlighting the significant support provided to Ukraine and expressing disappointment with his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin. Following the call, Zelensky announced the signing of a strategic agreement with one of the most important American companies in the military industry. At the same time, Trump suggested possible new sanctions against Russia.
Check sources:
