Ukrainian Foreign Minister Vadim Pristayko accused Russia of disrupting the summit of the "Norman Four" on September 17.

It seems that Minsk did not agree on the characters. In fact, the reason is different. Actually, it was the Ukrainian side that foiled the Norman Four summit.

The story is quite shameful, because Zelensky's exposing non-independence. It would seem a new president, but, it turned out, with old holes.

Here's what happened last weekend in Kiev.

Let me remind you first that after the exchange of prisoners, Kiev, represented by the new president, was ready for further steps according to the so-called Steinmeier formula. The new president and his people announced that they consider it necessary to proceed to the implementation of the Minsk agreements, and therefore began to agree on the date of the summit of the “Norman Four”. They gathered and declare an amnesty, and proceed to organize elections in the Donbass.

But the American special representative (this is the same Kurt Volker, still of the Poroshenko era) this weekend popularly explained to the new leadership of Ukraine that elections in “uncontrolled territories” can take place only after the withdrawal of “Russian troops” and the establishment of Ukrainian control over the border with the Russian Federation.

The Russian side reasonably thought: “But we didn’t agree so!” - and reasonably stopped preparing for the summit in the Norman format. (Steinmeier’s formula provided that there was no need to withdraw “Russian troops” from the territory of Donbass and that elections could be held in the near future.)

I repeat, so you remember. Since September 16, Zelensky no longer mentions the implementation of the Steinmeier formula. Namely, this implementation was a condition for Russia to hold a meeting in the Norman format.

Now Zelensky declares that he expects from the upcoming meeting in the Norman format "a decision on the release of all detainees and the determination of the timing of the separation of forces in the Donbass." In addition, according to Zelensky, now "the issue of the timing of the withdrawal of Russian troops before the local elections in the temporarily occupied territories" remains to be resolved.

That is, this song is good, start over. The President of Ukraine changed his testimony. Well, what will you do with him ?! Changed.

Analysts (I'm not always on their side, but this time share their point of view) say that Moscow in this situation was in a winning position. This Kiev refused the agreement. This is obvious to world public opinion.

Actually, you noticed that after the exchange of prisoners, which took place a week ago, interest in the problems of Ukraine has once again decreased in the world (I would even use the word "fell")?

Interest, you noticed, is constantly falling. But how much can one be interested in the problems of Ukraine? So the president of Estonia said that Europe is tired of Ukraine ...

There were once expressive commanders - Motorola and Givi. But they were destroyed, blown up.

Was with expressive whites of the eyes, combining perfectly with his vest, the head of the DPR Zakharchenko, but he was also blown up.

A mysterious and incredibly popular Zelensky came to power in Kiev in Kiev, and now it’s not a mysterious one.

Ukraine didn’t die yet, but interest in dying decreased.

In Kiev Ukraine, the radicals became non-radical: the fury that was, no, quietly sitting. Unless Yarosh suddenly scares, but no one is scared.

Other news stories capture us. Relations between Iran and America, a blow to the oil wells of Saudi Arabia. What's up with Zavorotnyuk? Wedding of Sobchak and Bogomolov.

And the confrontation between Kiev and the Donbass began more than five years ago. Yes, the Great Patriotic War lasted four years, and here more than five.

You and I saw directly how the United States demonstrated a session on managing Kiev’s foreign policy. They shouted Zelensky from Washington, and he obediently changed his testimony. Well, what is he after this servant of the Ukrainian people? He is a servant of the American administration.

The author’s point of view may not coincide with the position of the publisher.