Follow us on social

Diplomacy Watch

Diplomacy Watch: Putin and Zelenskyy say each other is the holdout

Serious talks in peril as neither side sees the other as legitimate

Reporting | QiOSK

Russian and Ukrainian leaders appear to be goading one another as to who is and who isn’t ready to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine.

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov charged late last week that Ukraine is not ready for serious negotiations. “Despite the increasingly loud talk about the need for peace talks,” he said, “there are objectively no practical actions indicating that Kyiv and the West are really ready for them.”

The Russian foreign minister added, “There is a (Ukrainian) legal ban on negotiations, and the issue of the legitimacy of the Ukrainian authorities is not being resolved,” said Lavrov — referring to the fact that Zelenskyy did not hold an election in May of 2024 and has been in power under martial law.

Meanwhile, Russian President Putin expressed concern that Zelenskyy is not legally qualified to sign a long-term peace agreement. “In terms of signing documents, everything has to be done in a way that legal experts confirm the legitimacy of those who are authorized by the Ukrainian state to sign these agreements," he said.

For his part, Zelenskyy shot back. “Today, Putin once again confirmed that he is afraid of negotiations, afraid of strong leaders, and does everything possible to prolong the war,” he posted on X.

Despite this rhetoric, support for a negotiated peace is high amongst Ukraine’s public, as many are war-weary. Additionally, some experts are optimistic. “There is much discussion on how to separate Russian and Ukrainian political posturing from their actual negotiating positions, but those distinctions will naturally emerge over the course of peace talks,” says the Quincy Institute’s Mark Episkopos. “The main task at hand is to incentivize both sides to negotiate in good faith.”

In other Ukraine war news this week:

President Trump and Secretary of State Marco Rubio announced a pause on most U.S. foreign aid last week, and now Ukrainians are beginning to feel the effects. The Guardian reports that most U.S. Aid programs in Ukraine have abruptly stopped.

The United States has provided Ukraine with $37 billion in humanitarian and development aid since the start of Russia’s invasion in 2022, mainly through the Agency for International Development (USAID).

“They’re going to feel the effect of this next week,” said Hope for Ukraine founder Yuriy Boyechko. Many organizations are unsure what to do in the long term but will temporarily use local and redirected funds to fill some funding holes.

Ukrainian President Zelenskyy indicated that the United States would continue providing military aid, but it is unclear how long the pause on other forms of assistance will last.

Reuters reports that Ukrainian officials uncovered “mass fraud” totaling around $40 million in its weapons procurement system. A contract for mortar shells had been reached with Lviv Arsenal, but the shells never arrived, and the money was moved to foreign accounts. “According to the investigation, former and current high-ranking officials of the Ministry of Defence and heads of affiliated companies are involved in the embezzlement,” said Ukrainian security officials.

At least 20 American mercenaries are MIA in Russia, hitting a 6-month spike, according to CNN. Additionally, the remains of at least 5 Americans are currently stuck in Europe as their extradition is being negotiated with European governments. It is unknown how many Americans have died in Ukraine so far.


Top Photo Credit: Diplomacy Watch

Diplomacy Watch

Reporting | QiOSK
Afghanistan withdrawal
Lloyd Austin, Kenneth McKenzie, and Mark Milley in 2021. (MSNBC screengrab)

Turns out leaving Afghanistan did not unleash terror on US or region

Military Industrial Complex

It will be four years since the U.S. withdrew from Afghanistan on Aug. 30, 2021, ending a nearly 20-year occupation that could serve as a poster child for mission creep.

What began in October 2001 as a narrow intervention to destroy al-Qaeda, the terrorist group that perpetrated the 9/11 attacks, and topple the Taliban government for refusing to hand over al-Qaeda’s leader, Osama bin Laden, morphed into an open-ended nation-building operation that killed 2,334 U.S. military personnel and wounded over 20,000 more.

keep readingShow less
Francois Bayrou Emmanuel Macron
Top image credit: France's Prime Minister Francois Bayrou arrives to hear France's President Emmanuel Macron deliver a speech to army leaders at l'Hotel de Brienne in Paris on July 13, 2025, on the eve of the annual Bastille Day Parade in the French capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe facing revolts, promising more guns with no money

Europe

If you wanted to create a classic recipe for political crisis, you could well choose a mixture of a stagnant economy, a huge and growing public debt, a perceived need radically to increase military spending, an immigration crisis, a deeply unpopular president, a government without a majority in parliament, and growing radical parties on the right and left.

In other words, France today. And France’s crisis is only one part of the growing crisis of Western Europe as a whole, with serious implications for the future of transatlantic relations.

keep readingShow less
Starmer Macron Merz
Top image credit: France's President Emmanuel Macron, Britain's Prime Minister Keir Starmer and Germany's Chancellor Friedrich Merz arrive at Kyiv railway station on May 10, 2025, ahead of a gathering of European leaders in the Ukrainian capital. LUDOVIC MARIN/Pool via REUTERS

Europe's snapback gamble risks killing diplomacy with Iran

Middle East

Europe appears set to move from threats to action. According to reports, the E3 — Britain, France, and Germany — will likely trigger the United Nations “snapback” process this week. Created under the 2015 Iran nuclear deal (JCPOA), this mechanism allows any participant to restore pre-2015 U.N. sanctions if Iran is judged to be in violation of its commitments.

The mechanism contains a twist that makes it so potent. Normally, the Security Council operates on the assumption that sanctions need affirmative consensus to pass. But under snapback, the logic is reversed. Once invoked, a 30-day clock begins. Sanctions automatically return unless the Security Council votes to keep them suspended, meaning any permanent member can force their reimposition with a single veto.

keep readingShow less

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.