framework

Can a significant and historic presence in Nicaea in commemoration of the 1700th anniversary of the first Ecumenical Council reshape the framework of global Christian dialogue? Pope Leo XIV stands on ground where the first common statement of Christian belief was formed seventeen centuries ago in the context of the first Ecumenical Council. The lake near Nicaea reflects a city marked by long memory. The visit does not seek public spectacle. It seeks depth.

Nicaea holds a rare form of significance. It represents a moment before fragmentation. A point where Christian leaders gathered to agree on the foundations of faith. The Creed shaped in this city became the common reference for churches that later followed separate paths. Modern reporting treats the return to this location as an event that reaches far beyond history.

Catholic analysts describe the entire journey as a platform for structured engagement in regions facing humanitarian risk. Diplomats notice that the visit creates three layers of meaning. The first is theological. The Creed continues to stand as the most stable reference point in the Christian world. It belongs to all. It excludes none. By returning to this shared foundation, the Pope frames dialogue on a level where long-standing differences do not erase the possibility of cooperation. Nicaea becomes neutral ground shaped by memory, not by competition.

The second layer concerns Turkey. The host country receives two ecclesiastical authorities with global reach. This presence allows Ankara to present a profile of stability and controlled engagement. The Turkish state seeks to gain diplomatic value by precisely managing an event of global religious interest. The visit shows that Turkey can provide a calm setting for high-level dialogue. This matters in a region where tensions remain visible and where regional trust is often fragile.

The third layer concerns the Ecumenical Patriarchate. The presence of the Ecumenical Patriarch in Nicaea reflects continuity. The Ecumenical Patriarchate appears as an institution that maintains a steady link to the origins of Christian identity. The visit confirms that this link remains relevant for contemporary diplomacy. The Ecumenical Patriarchate gains space to articulate its role in matters that extend beyond the inner life of the Church. It operates as a voice that connects historical experience with public responsibility.

The papal journey signals a shift in diplomatic rhythm. States often work inside short cycles, shaped by elections, immediate pressures, and shifting alliances. Religious institutions work with longer horizons. Their strength lies in stability and consistent representation. This contrast produces space for initiatives that require patience. Current challenges in Lebanon, instability in the Eastern Mediterranean, and the need to support minority communities demand actors who maintain firm positions without rapid fluctuations. A coordinated presence in Nicaea offers such a foundation.

The significance of the visit grows through its simplicity. A prayer beside the lake, a joint statement, and the act of walking together inside the historic city produce a stable message. Cooperation becomes visible without exaggeration. The region gains a moment of calm narrative. Christian communities observe two ancient institutions approaching each other with clarity and restraint. This image contributes to a sense of balance in an environment shaped by uncertainty.

Nicaea becomes a diplomatic space in its own right. It is not an arena of negotiation. It is a site that offers shared memory with no tension. Modern diplomacy often searches for locations that can support conversation without pressure. Nicaea provides this naturally. The city stands outside polarized debates. It holds symbolic value without imposing a political agenda. A papal visit strengthens this character and gives Nicaea renewed relevance in discussions about stability and cooperation.

The effects of this visit may unfold gradually. Joint humanitarian initiatives could gain stronger coordination. Churches may open structured channels for supporting communities under stress in Lebanon, Jordan, and other regions of the Middle East. Dialogue among Christian bodies can develop with greater consistency. States in the Eastern Mediterranean may engage with these institutions in more formal ways. All these possibilities gain substance because the visit gives clear institutional legitimacy to a shared framework.

The return to Nicaea does not promise rapid or dramatic transformation. It shapes a foundation for patient diplomacy. The city provides steady ground in a world where constant crises weaken attention spans. Nicaea speaks through continuity. The visit reminds the international community that institutions with long historical roots can offer stable guidance in periods of instability. This is not nostalgia. It is recognition that durable structures can support fragile societies.

In this sense, Nicaea gains a renewed voice. The city becomes a reference point for future cooperation. The Papal presence demonstrates that sacred geography can still influence public life. The visit marks a shift toward long-range planning where values and institutions act together. It suggests that global dialogue benefits from places where memory and responsibility meet without conflict.

Nicaea does not present solutions. It provides a framework where solutions become possible. For contemporary diplomacy, this may be its greatest contribution. A quiet moment becomes a stable foundation. A historic city becomes a modern point of connection. And a visit shaped by restraint becomes a clear signal that cooperation can grow from shared origins, even in a complex and fragmented world.

European allies of Ukraine have given a cautious welcome to efforts to refine a United States peace proposal initially criticised for appearing to be weighted in favour of Russia’s maximalist demands.

The leaders Germany, Finland, Poland and the United Kingdom were among those agreeing on Monday that progress had been made in the previous day’s talks between Washington and Kyiv in Geneva that yielded what the US and Ukraine called a “refined peace framework”.

Still, the European leaders stressed work remained to be done.

“It was possible to clear up some questions, but we also know that there won’t be peace in Ukraine overnight,” said German Chancellor Friedrich Merz, adding that the peace plan initially drafted by the US had been “modified in significant parts”.

He welcomed the “interim result”.

“The next step must be that Russia must come to the table,” he said from Angola, where he was attending a summit between African and European Union countries. “This is a laborious process. It will move forward at most in smaller steps this week. I do not expect there to be a breakthrough this week.”

US President Donald Trump had blindsided Kyiv and its European countries last week with a 28-point peace plan criticised by some as a Russian wish list that called for Ukraine to cede more territory, accept limits on its military and abandon its ambitions to join NATO.

Britain, France and Germany responded by drawing up a counter-proposal that would cease fighting at present front lines, leaving discussions of territory for later, and include a NATO-style US security guarantee for Ukraine, according to a draft seen by Reuters news agency.

UK Prime Minister Keir Starmer said that Ukraine’s allies in the “coalition of the willing” – a broad term for about 30 countries supporting Kyiv – will hold talks about the negotiations on Tuesday by video.

The German Foreign Office said that chief diplomats of Germany, Finland, France, the UK, Italy and Poland consulted Monday with Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sybiha on further steps toward ending the war.

Also attending the summit in Angola, European Council President Antonio Costa said there was “new momentum” in negotiations.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said the European Union would “engage further tomorrow with our partners from the coalition of the willing”.

‘Big progress’

On Monday, Trump indicated Sunday’s talks had gone well.

“Is it really possible that big progress is being made in Peace Talks between Russia and Ukraine??? Don’t believe it until you see it, but something good just may be happening,” the US President wrote on Truth Social.

Trump had given Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who is under the doubled pressure of Russia’s continued advance on the front line and a corruption scandal that has tainted his administration, until Thursday to agree to a framework to end the war. He also accused Zelenskyy of showing “zero gratitude” for peace efforts.

Zelenskyy said on X on Monday that he was expecting a full report that evening on the Geneva talks.

“To achieve real peace, more, more is needed. Of course, we all continue working with partners, especially the United States, and look for compromises that strengthen but not weaken us,” he said.

Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk also said on Monday that negotiations were a “delicate matter” since “no one wants to discourage Americans and President Trump from having the United States on our side in this process”.

The Kremlin said it had not been informed of the results of the Geneva talks, but that it was aware that “adjustments” were made to the US proposal.

In a call with Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Monday, Russian President Vladimir Putin repeated his view that the initial US plan could “serve as a basis for a final peace settlement”.

During the call, Erdogan said Turkiye was ready to support efforts to bring Russia and Ukraine together, including helping to facilitate direct talks between the two.

However, Russian presidential aide Yury Ushakov said the European plan appeared “entirely unconstructive and unsuitable for us”, according to a report in the Russian state-run TASS news agency.

Reporting from Moscow, Al Jazeera’s Yulia Shapovalova said Russia was unlikely to accept the European revisions.

“If all Russian conditions and interests are not taken into account, Russia is ready to continue fighting because, according to Vladimir Putin, Russia is pretty successful on the battlefield and it wants to achieve its goals,” she said.

In comments made by video to a meeting at the Swedish Parliament, Zelenskyy had indicated that territory would still be a key sticking point, accusing Russian President Vladimir Putin of seeking “legal recognition for what he has stolen”.

Grim reality

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has decimated the east of the country, forcing millions to flee their homes, ravaging towns and cities, and killing tens of thousands in Europe’s worst conflict since World War II.

On Monday, the war continued to grind on, with Russian forces keeping up their deadly and devastating strikes on civilian areas while making battlefield advances in Ukraine’s southeastern Zaporizhia region.

Russian drones hit residential areas of Kharkiv, Ukraine’s second-largest city overnight, killing four people and wounding 13, including two children, authorities said.

On Monday, Russian forces struck the city of Pavlohrad in Ukraine’s Dnipropetrovsk region with drones, wounding three people and damaging industrial facilities, according to regional authorities.

That morning, Russian shelling killed a 61-year-old woman in Kherson, according to the military administration of the city in southern Ukraine.

Across the border, Russian air defences downed Ukrainian drones en route to Moscow, forcing three airports serving the capital to pause flights.

A reported Ukrainian drone strike on Sunday knocked power out for thousands of residents near Moscow, a rare reversal of Russian attacks on energy targets that regularly cause power blackouts for millions of Ukrainians.

The United States and Ukraine have announced a revised framework for ending the Russia-Ukraine war after an earlier proposal by Washington drew criticism for being too favourable to Moscow.

US and Ukrainian officials said on Sunday that they agreed that any deal to end Russia’s war should “fully uphold” Ukraine’s sovereignty as they unveiled an “updated and refined peace framework” that was scant on details.

“Both sides agreed the consultations were highly productive. The discussions showed meaningful progress toward aligning positions and identifying clear next steps,” officials said in a joint statement following talks in Geneva, adding that the sides agreed on the need for a “sustainable and just peace”.

Washington and Kyiv also reiterated their readiness to keep working together to “secure a peace that ensures Ukraine’s security, stability, and reconstruction”, the joint statement said.

US Secretary of State Marco Rubio earlier on Sunday said the sides had made “tremendous” progress during the talks, though their joint statement offered no specifics for resolving the many thorny points of contention between Moscow and Kyiv.

Rubio said negotiators had made some changes to US President Donald Trump’s 28-point peace plan, including around the role of NATO, to narrow the differences between the sides.

“I can tell you that the items that remain open are not insurmountable. We just need more time than what we have today. I honestly believe we’ll get there,” Rubio told reporters at the US mission in Geneva.

Rubio declined to go into specifics about the amendments to the draft proposal, including whether Kyiv had agreed to compromise on key Russian demands, such as territorial concessions.

“But I can tell you, I guess, that I feel very optimistic that we can get something done here because we made a tremendous amount of progress today,” Rubio said.

Rubio’s cautiously optimistic remarks came after Trump, who has given Ukraine until Thursday to accept his 28-point plan, had earlier accused Kyiv of being insufficiently grateful for his administration’s assistance.

“UKRAINE ‘LEADERSHIP’ HAS EXPRESSED ZERO GRATITUDE FOR OUR EFFORTS, AND EUROPE CONTINUES TO BUY OIL FROM RUSSIA,” Trump posted on his social media site, Truth Social.

Shortly after Trump’s comments, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said on X that he was grateful to the US and “personally to President Trump” for Washington’s assistance in repelling Moscow’s invasion.

Trump’s leaked blueprint for ending the war has caused consternation in Kyiv and European capitals due to its alignment with many of Moscow’s hardline demands, including that Ukraine limit the size of its military and give up Crimea, Luhansk and Donetsk.

Zelenskyy said in a sombre national address last week that the plan put Ukraine in the position of having to choose between “losing dignity” or “losing a key partner”.

European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen said on Sunday that any peace plan needed to respect Ukraine’s freedom to “choose its own destiny,” including to join the bloc.

“It starts with the country’s reconstruction, its integration into our Single Market and our defence industrial base, and ultimately, joining our Union,” von der Leyen said in a statement.

Asked whether a deal could be reached by Trump’s Thursday deadline, Rubio said “we want to get this done as soon as possible”.

“Obviously, we would love it to be Thursday,” he said.

Rubio said the peace plan was a “living, breathing document” and would continue to change.

The top US diplomat also said the deal would need to be presented to Moscow for its approval.

“Obviously, the Russians get a vote here,” he said.

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Friday that Trump’s plan could form the basis for a final peace settlement, but warned that Moscow would advance further into Ukrainian territory if Kyiv refused to negotiate.

The agreement is not expected to immediately change things on the ground, but to move forward a larger peace process.

Representatives from the government of the Democratic Republic of the Congo (DRC) and the Rwandan-backed M23 rebel group have signed a peace deal in Qatar with the ultimate goal of putting an end to years of fighting.

Qatar and the United States announced the “comprehensive” deal in Doha on Saturday, setting it up as a roadmap to stop the deadly fighting and improve the dire humanitarian situation in the Central African nation.

The two sides have been holding mediated talks for months, and signed a truce deal in July that must still be subjected to more negotiations over exactly how it will be implemented.

Addressing a press conference in Doha on Saturday, Qatar’s Minister of State Mohammed bin Abdulaziz Al-Khulaifi said the latest agreement enhances the process in order to “find peaceful solutions through dialogue and understanding” to re-establish calm in the DRC.

He said the different sides achieved progress on several substantial topics in order to build on previous agreements discussed and signed over the past several months.

The agreement includes eight implementation protocols, two of which have already been signed, including one on ceasefire monitoring and another on prisoner exchange.

The rest of the protocols are expected to be discussed and finalised over the coming weeks. They will include a timeline as well as details on how different processes will work, how humanitarian aid will be allowed to reach the ailing population, and how to enable the return of refugees and internally displaced people.

Restoring state authority, implementing economic reforms, reintegration of armed groups into the government and the elimination of foreign groups are among other protocols that will need to be finalised.

Both sides have agreed to establish an independent committee to implement the peace process, and also to provide recommendations for recompensation within the framework of national reconciliation, which will be in line with the constitution of the republic, Qatar’s Al-Khulaifi said.

Massad Boulos, a senior advisor and envoy for US President Donald Trump who represented Washington in the talks, thanked the state of Qatar and other stakeholders who assisted the process, including the African Union and the state of Togo.

He told the conference in Doha that the agreement comes amid joint efforts with Qatar that have also yielded results in other areas, including the ceasefire deal reached between Israel and Hamas.

“Today is a historic occasion in many ways,” he said, referring to the framework deal on DRC as a “launching pad” for an eventual peace deal that will be built based on previous and ongoing negotiations.

“People were expecting some immediate results on the ground, but this is a process, this is not a light switch that you can turn on and off, and there are many angles to it,” Boulos said.

Reporting from Goma, Al Jazeera’s Alain Uakyani said the peace agreement has inspired hope among the population in the DRC, but not for any immediate and tangible changes on the ground.

He pointed out that the M23 said its forces were bombarded by the government on Saturday morning, but managed to take more ground from DRC soldiers.