Follow us on social

google cta
Screen-shot-2023-05-22-at-4.21.35-pm

Lula walks away from G7 less interested in ending war in Ukraine

Brazil's president claims Zelensky stood him up at the summit in a he-said, he-said tit-for-tat, making his role as peacemaker more elusive.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva had an eventful few days at last weekend’s G7 summit in Hiroshima, Japan, with one clear takeaway: relations between Brazil and Ukraine are colder now than they were last week. Indeed, one might even conclude that the Brazilian president is now giving up on the prospect of contributing to a formal peace between Russia and Ukraine.

Since before taking office in January, Lula has insisted that both Russia and Ukraine should stop fighting and begin discussing peace terms. He has argued for convening a small group of countries — including Brazil, Latin America’s largest nation and the world’s fourth-largest democracy — with no direct involvement in the conflict to mediate negotiations.

This position has been criticized widely for equating Russian and Ukrainian culpability in the ongoing conflagration and indicating a tacit endorsement of Russia’s position that the war resulted from years of NATO-led provocations on its Western flank.

Some have called Lula either hopelessly naïve or deeply cynical. The reality, however, is that Lula’s position is rational considering his nation’s interests. As Oliver Stuenkel, an associate professor of international relations at the Getulio Vargas Foundation in São Paulo, wrote in a recent piece, “while it is tempting to dismiss Lula’s quest for peace in Ukraine as quixotic, Brazil’s assertiveness reveals broader misgivings across the global south about the inclusiveness of the supposedly liberal international order.”

With this stance clearly expressed, Celso Amorim, Lula’s former foreign minister and closest adviser on international affairs, visited Ukraine earlier this month after having previously traveled to Russia. While Ukraine’s deputy minister of foreign affairs tweeted: “We are slowly changing the mood between Ukraine and Brazil” (he included a wink emoji, signaling either confidence or irony), Brazil hasn’t appeared to change its position in the days after that trip. The Ukrainians invited Lula to visit but he has yet to accept the offer and there has been very little reported communication between Brazilian and Ukrainian officials. This is why President Volodymyr Zelensky’s sudden arrival at the G7 summit on Saturday — a visit "decided in haste and kept secret until the last moment,” according to Le Mondewas such an intriguing diplomatic development. Would he and Lula finally sit down together?

Ultimately, they would not. As Zelensky entered the room where heads of state were gathered on Sunday, footage shows several leaders approaching to greet him. Lula, eyes fixed on a piece of paper in his hand, did not get up. Many on social media and beyond interpreted this as a slight, but it is not out of character for Lula.

During a visit to the G8 summit in 2003, his first as president, Lula remained seated while others stood as President George W. Bush entered the room. “Nobody got up when I walked in,” he later recalled, “so I wouldn't stand for anyone else.” Zelensky would go on to hold private meetings with most of the assembled heads of state. He apparently got no firm response from the Brazilians for hours. Finally, Lula scheduled a talk for Sunday at 3:15 p.m., but when the time came, he claims Zelensky stood him up. When asked afterward if he was disappointed that he didn’t meet with Lula, Zelensky replied tersely, a wry smirk crossing his face: “I think he was disappointed.”

For his part, Lula insisted that his team had set the meeting but was told at the agreed upon time that Zelensky would be late. Lula then met with the Vietnamese president for an hour during which, he said, the Ukrainian never showed. “That's what happened. That is, if he had a more serious problem, a more important meeting, I don’t know.”

Responding to Zelensky’s quip about him being disappointed, Lula said he was not disappointed but upset at the missed opportunity. “But look,” he concluded, “Zelensky is over-age. He knows what he's doing.”

The broader dynamics that Lula has been criticizing for months remain unchanged, as he noted, with neither Zelensky nor Putin serious about an immediate ceasefire. Biden, Lula said, “doesn't talk about peace,” insisting instead on unilateral Russian surrender, an approach that “doesn’t help” end the conflict. The Brazilian president reiterated his condemnation of Russian’s invasion of Ukraine’s sovereignty and his recognition that Ukraine has the right to defend itself but wondered, "how long will this go?"

Overall, the G7’s attempts to more prominently feature major players from beyond the richest democratic nations produced little substance. As Max Lawson, head of Inequality Policy at Oxfam, put it, “if the G7 really want closer ties to the developing countries and greater backing from them for the war in Ukraine, then asking Global South leaders to fly across the world for a couple of hours is not going to cut it,” adding that “they need to cancel debts and do what it takes to end hunger.”

With no clear breakthrough, Lula said he is happy to visit Ukraine if it means traveling to Russia shortly thereafter to talk peace. That prospect is unfortunately not in the offing, as Lula surely knows. Neither, it seems, is Brazilian mediation to help end the war. It is a sad day in global geopolitics when personal squabbles color momentous decisions of life and death.


Photos: Marcelo Chello and Review News via shutterstock.com
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Witkoff Kushner Ukraine
Top photo credit: U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and U.S. businessman Jared Kushner deliver a press conference upon the signing of the declaration on deploying post-ceasefire force in Ukraine during the so-called 'Coalition of the Willing' summit, at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, January 6, 2026. Ludovic Marin/Pool via REUTERS

Is Ukraine peace toast, now that the Middle East is on fire?

Europe

President Donald Trump came into office promising to end wars, but last week, he instead started a new one, when he ordered what the White House is calling a “proactive defensive” operation in response to Iran’s “imminent threat.”

The onset of yet another U.S.-initiated conflict in the Middle East deals a double blow to Trump’s ambitions as a peacemaker. It has obviously derailed, perhaps permanently, the on-and-off talks between Tehran and Washington over the future of Iran’s nuclear program. But it is also likely to interfere with another Trump priority: ending the four-year-long war between Russia and Ukraine.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.