The armed conflict in Ukraine, apparently, will be completed at the negotiating table, said NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg.

He expressed this opinion in an interview published on Saturday, June 25, with the Spanish newspaper El País.

At the same time, Stoltenberg explained what role the North Atlantic Alliance plays in this situation.

“We are responsible for ensuring that Ukraine’s position is as strong as possible and helping it remain a sovereign and independent European nation ... And the best way to do this is to provide powerful military and economic support and promote tough sanctions against Russia,” TASS quotes the head of the alliance.

Commenting on this statement, the head of the State Duma Committee on International Affairs, Leonid Slutsky, stated that in words NATO is in favor of the negotiation process, but in fact they are doing everything to prevent it from taking place.

The parliamentarian also stressed that Western restrictions will not be able to weaken Russia's position.

“Military support for Ukraine is perceived by the Kyiv regime as an indulgence: civilians are killed with Western weapons, war crimes are committed, and in Brussels they are only handing out the status of members in the EU,” the deputy noted.

Last week, on June 19, Stoltenberg, in an interview with Bild am Sonntag, argued that Western countries should not rule out a scenario in which Ukraine would have to be supported for “years”, regardless of possible negative consequences.

“We must be prepared for the fact that the conflict may drag on for years.

We must not weaken support for Ukraine, even if the costs are high: not only in terms of military assistance, but also in view of rising energy and food prices,” the NATO Secretary General said.

Contradictory positions

The other day, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba, commenting on potential negotiations with the Russian Federation, did not rule out that the subject of discussion could be the establishment of the country's borders as "until February 24."

So he answered the question about Kyiv's readiness to discuss this topic, while refusing to return to the 1991 borders.

Recall that at an early stage of the conflict, Moscow and Kyiv held several rounds of negotiations, but at the end of March the process was actually frozen at the initiative of the Ukrainian side.

This has been repeatedly pointed out by Russian officials.

In particular, in early June, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said that Western countries did not allow Kyiv to negotiate.

“Ukraine seemed to put forward a proposal two months ago on how to resolve this issue.

We have taken these proposals as a basis.

So a day later (after a meeting of delegations in Istanbul. -

RT

) the West forbade Ukrainians to continue this process, ”explained the head of Russian diplomacy.

  • Minister of Foreign Affairs of the Russian Federation Sergey Lavrov

  • © RIA Novosti / Press service of the Russian Foreign Ministry

At the same time, contradictory statements are coming from Kyiv regarding the prospects for the negotiation process.

So, the same Kuleba at the end of May said that Ukraine had no additional conditions for resuming the dialogue.

In turn, the head of the Ukrainian delegation, David Arakhamia, expressed the opinion on June 18 that Kyiv would continue negotiations with the Russian Federation in August, after it “carried out a counteroffensive.”

At the same time, Arakhamia argued that Ukraine does not accept the alienation of the territory, but can consider a political agreement similar to the one that the representatives of Kyiv proposed in Istanbul.

Conflict of interests

At the same time, some Western politicians are concerned that the EU countries may force Ukraine to conclude peace on unfavorable terms.

In particular, this concern was expressed by British Prime Minister Boris Johnson.

“Too many countries say that this is a European war that is not necessary ... thus, pressure will increase to push (or maybe force) Ukrainians to a bad peace,” Reuters quotes him as saying.

Commenting on the situation, Dmitry Yegorchenkov, director of the RUDN Institute for Strategic Studies and Forecasts, in an interview with RT, recalled that Kyiv itself withdrew from the negotiation process under the influence of the United States and Great Britain.

“Ukraine is not an independent and sovereign political entity, its authorities are under constant external control.

At some point in Washington, it was decided that negotiations were no longer expedient, at least in the positions that existed at that time, ”the expert noted.

He found it difficult to predict exactly how and in what time frame the dialogue could be revived.

“Now everything is developing in a vein that, in a certain sense, is even beneficial for Russia, because the Americans have not yet begun to use the negotiation process to slow down the Russian special operation.

Such a version is quite possible from the point of view of political technologies,” Yegorchenkov added.

  • Employees of the military police of the Russian Federation in the Kherson region

  • © RIA Novosti / Ivan Rodionov

In turn, political scientist Alexander Asafov believes that statements about the possible conclusion of a peace treaty on unfavorable terms for Kyiv signal that the curators of the Kyiv regime in London and Washington intend to continue to persuade him to continue hostilities.

“This is the British-American consensus, their goals and objectives, so they undertook all possible ways of pressure (although it would be more correct to say - the management of the Kyiv regime) in order to immediately withdraw from the dialogue after significant progress along the negotiation track in Istanbul,” the expert emphasized. .

At the same time, NATO countries cannot endlessly supply the Kyiv regime with weapons and simultaneously saturate it with military equipment necessary to change the balance of power on the battlefield, Asafov explained.

“There is simply no such amount of free, ready-to-use weapons in which Zelensky asks for it.

The aid that is being delivered does not always reach the war zone.

Often it is destroyed even in places of storage.

This is not enough to change the balance of power, but this is a demonstration of Western support for Kyiv, ”the political scientist said.

For his part, Vladimir Bruter, an expert at the International Institute for Humanitarian and Political Studies, commenting on Boris Johnson’s statement, noted that an agreement that London, and not Kyiv, would not suit, would be considered “bad”.

At the same time, according to Bruter, the countries of Europe have become hostages of the course of the United States and Great Britain, which are determined to continue the conflict.

“Europeans from the very beginning were captured by the circumstances that led to the fact that the conflict took on an armed character.

Therefore, the EU is constantly putting pressure on Ukraine, including during the recent trip of the three leaders to Kyiv.

Then they tried to explain to the Ukrainian leadership that they were interested in resolving the situation as quickly and as peacefully as possible, ”the expert recalled.

However, he doubted that Europe could in any way force Kyiv to agree to an end to hostilities.

“First, because in a sense it means admitting that the course that has been pursued all along is wrong.

Secondly, the Ukrainian leadership is not free in its choice - it completely depends on what they decide in Washington, and not at all in Brussels.

Third point: The US and Britain will not agree to any option for a peaceful solution until it is, as Johnson said, beneficial to them.

They say in plain text that they will help Ukraine until the situation changes and Kyiv has an advantage.

What exactly they are ready to give will be decided at the moment when they understand the need for concessions.

In the meantime, they believe that the time has not come for this, ”concluded the interlocutor of RT.