“On Tuesday, March 18, there was a telephone conversation between US President Donald Trump and the Kremlin head Vladimir Putin. The negotiations lasted about 2.5 hours. UA.News appealed to experts to share their thoughts and estimates of yesterday’s negotiations. Political scientist, director of the Ukrainian Institute of Policy Ruslan Bortnik believes that during a telephone conversation between President Trump and”, – WRITE ON: ua.news
On Tuesday, March 18, there was a telephone conversation between US President Donald Trump and the Kremlin head Vladimir Putin. The negotiations lasted about 2.5 hours.
UA.News appealed to experts to share their thoughts and estimates of yesterday’s negotiations.
Political scientist, director of the Ukrainian Institute of Policy Ruslan Bortnik He believes that during a telephone conversation between President Trump and Putin, both parties showed high interest in improving relationships, and discussed a wide range of difficult issues that need to be addressed. At the same time, there are significant differences between the positions of the White House and the Kremlin.
“In 2.5 hours of negotiation, the leaders discussed about 15 topics and reached certain steps towards their solution. This conversation has become the fifth contact of a high level in the last month, which indicates the awareness of both parties about each other’s positions. The lack of a joint statement or press conference may testify not only to the complexity of the topics discussed, but also to keep some of the negotiation details of the secret to achieve better results.
Personated statements have many common features in the issues of goals and key points, but are distinguished. Both sides emphasized the desire for peace, ceasefire and stabilization of the situation in the world, which indicates a mutual understanding of the need to reduce tensions. At the same time, Russia paid special attention to the issue of Ukraine, demanding the cessation of mobilization, supply of Western weapons and the transfer of intelligence data as a condition for a complete truce and a further peace agreement. Moscow also accused Kyiv of misconduct. The White House escaped such statements by focusing on a positive mood about peace and cooperation. The Russian side also emphasized the humanitarian aspects, including the safety of Ukrainian prisoners of war and the exchange of prisoners, ”Bortnik comments.
According to the expert, one of the key practical results of the negotiations was the consent of the Russian Federation to the US proposal for a 30-day truce in terms of energy in energy infrastructure. This provision was referred to in the statements of both parties, and the Kremlin stressed that the Russian military received the appropriate order immediately after the negotiations.
“The parties also agreed to continue the dialogue on the armistice in the Black Sea. Both of these ideas, which involve the gradual cessation of hostilities, were previously presented by French President Macron and President Zelensky. This approach is a tactical victory for these leaders, and allows the United States to avoid accusations that negotiations are happening without the participation of Ukraine and Europe. It should be noted that the list of issues discussed in the context of war in Ukraine went beyond the standard ceasefire agreement and actually set a frame for a potential peace treaty, which was confirmed by the President of the United States in his later statement … This can be considered diplomatic success for Russia, at the same time. Bortnik.
An expert on international issues Yulia Osmolovskaya He believes that a bad role in the conversation of two presidents has played high expectations of society. At the same time, these expectations were produced by Donald Trump himself.
“Everyone expected the reaction that the presidents would say, whether it would be possible to reach a full ceasefire according to the US proposal. This is also correlated on the G7 statement, in which they congratulated Ukraine’s readiness for unconditional ceasefire and expected the same from Russia on similar conditions – that is, without any additional conditions. At the same time, the Russian Federation has already hinted that nothing would work out so much, because there are “nuances”. From what we have – it is worth comparing two statements and looking for common things. And here is a big and great discrepancy between the position of Russia and America.
The American text looks more moderate, objective and informed. They talk about the need to trade further through political and diplomatic settlement, they have agreed with the Russians to stop the strikes on infrastructure and energy. The US statement further speaks of technical negotiations on the safety of navigation in the Black Sea. After that, negotiations should be held on the conditions of complete ceasefire, and only then – determining the modality of the general peace agreement. But the Russian side, in its statement, threw everything she wanted, adding all her grades there. It is very important to understand: in the Russian statement, there is no fact that the parties have agreed on a key prerequisite for regulation – termination of military assistance and providing intelligence data to Ukraine. There is a phrase that Moscow emphasized. But on the fact of the arrangements not recorded, these are “hotels” that have not supported in the USA”, – says Osmolovskaya.
The expert acknowledges that the Russian side raises important technical issues. For example, the technical support of the ceasefire mode throughout the front line is more than 1000 kilometers.
“Russia also advocates the cessation of supply of weapons and mobilization in Ukraine. But it cannot work unilaterally, as well as the Russian Federation. That is, parity must be observed here if we discuss this requirement seriously … In general, we can talk about careful optimism. The US and the Russian Federation, as can be seen from their official statements, did not agree in all, Russian and American positions do not coincide everywhere, there are differences in the interpretation of agreements. The main thing is that in the White House statement they say that it is a “war in Ukraine”. And Russia is trying to constantly emphasize that it is a “conflict around Ukraine”. Trump in his post on social networks writes that there should be an end to this war between Russia and Ukraine. That is, the US President has a clear understanding that this is the war between the Russian Federation and Ukraine, not some internal conflict», – summed up Yulia Osmolovskaya.
Earlier, Trump called the conditions for weakening sanctions against the Russian Federation.
