Putin

President Vladimir Putin has said he is ready to guarantee in writing that Russia will not attack another European nation, as he dismissed claims that Moscow intends to invade another country as a “lie” and “complete nonsense”.

Speaking on Thursday in Kyrgyzstan’s capital, Bishkek – where he attended a summit of the Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO), a Russia-led military alliance that includes some former Soviet republics – Putin branded claims Moscow is planning to attack Europe as “ridiculous”.

“The truth is, we never intended to do that. But if they want to hear it from us, well, then we’ll document it. No question,” the Russian president told reporters.

Putin’s denials that Moscow is planning another invasion have been met with scepticism from European leaders, who point to the fact that he repeatedly denied Russia would invade Ukraine before doing so in February 2022.

Responding to questions about efforts to end the war in Ukraine, Putin expressed optimism about a draft United States-backed peace plan, saying it could serve as the “basis for future agreements”.

While Putin said Russia is ready for a “serious” discussion to end the war, he also warned that Moscow was prepared to fight on if necessary and take over more of Ukraine.

A basic prerequisite to end the fighting, he reiterated, was that Ukrainian troops withdraw from Donetsk and Luhansk in eastern Ukraine’s Donbas region, including leaving areas that Russian troops do not currently control.

“Ukrainian troops must withdraw from the territories they currently hold – then the fighting will stop. If they do not pull back, we will achieve this by military means,” he said.

Ukraine has said that such a withdrawal would leave the way open for a Russian assault on its capital, Kyiv.

‘The president has lost his legitimate status’

Putin also suggested that he was open to a negotiated settlement with Kyiv, but once again branded Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s government illegitimate, adding that it was “legally impossible” to sign any agreements with them.

“Broadly speaking, of course, we ultimately want to reach an agreement with Ukraine. But right now, this is practically impossible,” Putin said, repeating previous unfounded claims that Kyiv had lost the right to govern after failing to hold elections when Zelenskyy’s presidential term expired in May 2024.

“The Ukrainian leadership made a fundamental strategic mistake when it feared presidential elections, because since then, the president has lost his legitimate status,” Putin added.

Kyiv has maintained it could not hold elections while under martial law and defending its territory against Russian attacks. In February, lawmakers in Ukraine’s parliament overwhelmingly approved a resolution affirming Zelenskyy’s legitimacy to stay in office.

Putin also claimed that, due to the Zelenskyy government’s purported illegitimacy, any peace deal must be recognised by the international community, and that the international community must also recognise Russian gains in Ukraine.

The Ukrainian president’s chief of staff, Andriy Yermak, reiterated on Thursday that Zelenskyy “will not sign away territory”.

“As long as Zelenskyy is president, no one should count on us giving up territory,” Yermak told US magazine The Atlantic.

Last week, the US revealed a 28-point peace plan for Ukraine that was widely viewed as extremely favourable to Russia. It called for Kyiv to make major concessions, including ceding territory and abandoning its NATO ambitions.

The plan has since been altered with Ukrainian input, Ukrainian First Deputy Foreign Minister Sergiy Kyslytsya said, nixing a 600,000-member cap on Ukraine’s army and a general war crimes amnesty.

On Thursday, Zelenskyy said Ukrainian delegations are set to meet with Washington officials to work out a formula discussed at previous talks in Geneva to bring peace and provide security guarantees for Kyiv.

He added, without providing details, that there would be further talks next week.

US representatives, including Trump’s special envoy, Steve Witkoff, are also set to travel to Moscow next week to continue discussions on key issues, including security guarantees for Ukraine and Europe.

Putin said his delegation intends to raise its own “key issue” with the US delegation, specifically a passage in the peace plan stating that Washington only intends to recognise Russia’s de facto control over Crimea and other Ukrainian territory, which Moscow claims as its own.

“That is precisely what our talks with the American side will be about,” Putin said.

WASHINGTON — Russia stood alone Friday to veto a U.N. resolution condemning its “brutal” invasion of Ukraine, killing the measure — for now. But all other members in the solemn session of the U.N. Security Council either voted in favor or abstained, testament to rounds of intensive diplomatic pleas by the Biden administration.

The U.S.-drafted measure, which demands the immediate, complete and unconditional withdrawal of the Russian troops battering Ukraine, was approved by 11 members. Most notably, China, thought to be in Moscow’s corner, abstained. So did two U.S. allies, India and the United Arab Emirates, in a disappointment for the U.S. Russia, as one of five permanent members, holds veto power, which it exercised.

That Russia’s “isolation” was so starkly drawn was hailed as a major victory by U.S. diplomats. And they vowed they will carry a similar resolution to the full 193-member General Assembly, where there are no vetoes and only a simple majority is needed to pass.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, said that she was not surprised by the Russian veto but that it would not deter efforts to rebuke and stop Moscow’s aggression.

“Russia, you can veto this resolution, but you cannot veto our voices,” she said, looking directly at the Russian representative, Vasily Nebenzya, who, in one of the peculiarities of U.N. politics, was chairing the session as rotating president of the council.

“You cannot veto the truth,” Thomas-Greenfield continued. “You cannot veto our principles. You cannot veto the Ukrainian people. You cannot veto the U.N. Charter. And you will not veto accountability.”

Nebenzya, after the vote but with the council still in session, took Thomas-Greenfield and several other Western representatives to task for what they had condemned as egregious abuses and attacks on civilians by Russian forces.

“Who are you to moralize?” he said. Thomas-Greenfield looked back at him, stone-faced.

He and the Ukrainian ambassador, Sergiy Kyslytsya, also had testy exchanges. Nebenzya called his Ukrainian counterpart “boorish,” while Kyslytsya said Nebenzya and his comments accusing Ukraine of repression earned him a special “seat in hell.”

Friday’s vote followed senior U.S. diplomats’ intense lobbying of their counterparts from dozens of countries to back the resolution at the Security Council or at a possible later meeting of the full United Nations, where a similar condemnation could be brought.

Russia “will be shown to be isolated on the world stage,” State Department spokesman Ned Price said a couple of hours ahead of the vote.

Although the Americans were disappointed that India and the UAE did not join in the “yes” column, it was China’s decision to abstain that gave them particular relief.

Before Friday’s meeting, U.S. diplomats expressed the likelihood that Beijing would side with Moscow. They saw glimmers of hope, however: President Xi Jinping has been publicly measured in support for the invasion. Although he values a growing relationship with Moscow, he may also be reluctant to pick too bitter a fight with the U.S. and NATO.

The Chinese representative to the Security Council, Zhang Jun, explained his country’s vote saying that although China did not support violating the sovereignty of another nation, as Russia has done, the resolution might add “fuel to the fire” rather than contributing to a diplomatic path to peace. He also said Russia’s “legitimate security aspirations” had to be addressed.

“Ukraine should become a bridge between East and West, not an outpost for confrontation among major powers,” Zhang said.

Similarly, the UAE and India said that although they abhorred Russia’s actions, they feared the resolution would shut the door to diplomacy and dialogue. Both countries, especially India, also have strong ties to Russia.

The Security Council vote came after increased economic sanctions the Biden administration imposed on Russia on Thursday — and on Putin himself on Friday — which had been augmented by a series of measures by the European Union.

Rallying broader support for a condemnation of Russia, however, had been a surprisingly difficult task for U.S. diplomats.

Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken and his deputy, Wendy R. Sherman, as well as other officials, had been on the phone to counterparts from a host of nations, including Portugal, Turkey, Moldova, Israel and Saudi Arabia. Those efforts followed months of in-person and virtual consultations and warnings among allies about Russia’s designs on Ukraine.

India had been an especially prickly case. In addition to historical ties with Moscow, New Delhi in recent years has built a defense and diplomatic partnership with Washington.

But India was tepid in its initial response to Russia’s aggression. During a Security Council session that unfolded in New York on Wednesday night as President Vladimir Putin unleashed Russian troops on Ukraine, India’s representative called for de-escalation but did not condemn Moscow. So, while not a “yes,” India’s abstention Friday could have been worse, diplomats said.

A Biden administration official who briefed reporters on the U.S. strategy for the Security Council rejected any suggestion that the difficulty in putting together a united front reflected the impotence of consensus-based global organizations like the United Nations and especially the Security Council, where Russia and China are permanent members, along with the United States, France and Britain. Russia currently holds the rotating president’s seat on the council.

“It’s important that we send a message to Ukraine, to Russia and to the world that the Security Council will not look away,” said the official, who briefed reporters on condition of anonymity to discuss behind-the-scenes deliberations. “The council was established to respond to precisely this scenario: a stronger country waging war against a weaker neighbor in violation of the U.N. Charter and the principles of the U.N. Charter.”

But U.N. Secretary-General António Guterres, who spoke to reporters after the Security Council meeting, was clearly disappointed.

The United Nations “was born out of war, to end war,” he said. “Today that objective was not achieved.”

Nov. 27 (UPI) — Russian President Vladimir Putin said Thursday that he was receptive to the latest U.S. plan to end the conflict in Ukraine, but insisted the country’s forces would have to give up territory.

Putin made the comments to reporters during a visit to the central Asian country of Kyrgyzstan ahead of U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff’s visit to Moscow next week. Witkoff is expected to discuss a version of the Trump administration’s 28-point peace plan that’s been criticized for allowing Russia to keep territory seized by force and barring Ukraine from joining the western NATO military alliance.

The Russian leader said the U.S. government is now taking some of its positions into account and that the U.S. plan “can be used” as the basis for future agreements, the state-run TASS news agency reported. However, the plan needed to be refined into “diplomatic language,” while other points were non-starters.

Russia currently controls about 20% of Ukraine, about 1,500 square miles, since launching its invasion nearly four years ago. Putin said Russian forces would continue their advance in the eastern Donbass region, The Moscow Times reported.

“Ukrainian forces will have to leave the territories they currently occupy, and then the fighting will stop,” he said. “If they don’t, we will achieve this by military means.”

Russia analyst Tatiana Stanovaya wrote in a post on X that Putin “feels more confident than ever about the battlefield situation and is convinced that he can wait until Kyiv finally accepts that it cannot win and must negotiate on Russia’s well-known terms.”

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky has rejected calls for the country to cede territory and has insisted that any peace deal include security guarantees against further Russian aggression.

“The Russians are peddling the narrative around the world that Ukraine allegedly cannot defend itself,” Zelensky said in a post X Wednesday. “They are saying that Ukrainian warriors cannot defend themselves. The daily combat results of the Ukrainian army, our special forces, and deep strikes — these are all proof that Ukraine can defend its interests.”

Putin also stated that signing any agreement with Ukraine was pointless, implying that it was illegitimate because it had not held elections during the conflict, The Kyiv Independent reported.

However, the paper pointed out that Ukraine’s constitution prohibits elections from being held under martial law, which was declared at the beginning of the conflict in 2022.

LONDON — President Trump’s efforts to broker an end to the Russia-Ukraine war closely mirrors the tactics he used to end two years of fighting between Israel and Hamas: bold terms that favor one side, deadlines for the combatants and vague outlines for what comes next. The details — enforcing the terms, guaranteeing security, who pays for rebuilding — matter less.

“You know what the deadline is to me? When it’s over.” Trump told reporters aboard Air Force One Tuesday.

The formula has worked so far in the tense Middle East, though its long-term viability remains in question. Trump got his moment to claim credit for “peace” in the region from the podium of the Israeli parliament. Even there, he made clear that next on his priority list was resolving the largest armed conflict in Europe since World War II.

“Maybe we set out like a 20-point peace proposal, just like we did in Gaza,” U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff told Yuri Ushakov, Russian President Vladimir Putin’s foreign policy adviser in a phone call the day after Trump’s speech, on Oct. 14. A recording of that call leaked to Bloomberg News.

They did just that, issuing a 28-point plan heavily tilted toward Russia’s interests that set off alarms in Europe, which had not been consulted. Trump insisted Ukraine had until Nov. 27 — Thanksgiving in the U.S. — to accept it.

But by Tuesday, Trump had eased off the hard deadline. It seemed clear, even to Trump, that the Israel-Gaza model doesn’t fully apply in Russia and Ukraine as long as Putin refuses to be flattered, pushed or otherwise moved to take the first step of a ceasefire, as Israel and Hamas consented for different reasons on Oct. 9. Making the point, Putin launched waves of bombings on Ukraine Tuesday and Wednesday even as American negotiators renewed Trump’s push to end the war.

“I thought (a Russia-Ukraine deal) would have been an easier one, but I think we’re making progress,” Trump said during the annual White House turkey pardon to mark the Thanksgiving holiday. Hours later, he told reporters that the 28-point plan actually “was not a plan, just a concept.”

The president’s goal may not be a formal, long-lasting peace treaty, one expert said.

“Trump’s approach emphasizes the proclamation of a ceasefire, not its observance,” Mariia Zolkina, a political analyst at the Kyiv-based Ilko Kucheriv Democratic Initiatives Foundation, wrote on Liga.net, a Ukrainian news outlet, adding: “Donald Trump is not interested in whether the ceasefire will be sustainable.”

Similarities to the tactics and style used in the Israel-Gaza talks

Fresh off the Gaza deal and coveting the Nobel Peace Prize, Trump named his next priority before he’d even left the Israeli Knesset.

“If you don’t mind, Steve, let’s focus on Russia first, All right?” Trump said, turning to Witkoff.

Where the Gaza ceasefire agreement had 20 points, the Russia-Ukraine proposal would start with 28 items and include more detail on who would pay for reconstruction. They envision “peace” boards headed by the president to lead and administer the aftermath. Both lack detail on incentives for complying and enforcement. And both depend on a ceasefire.

Fabian Zuleeg, chief executive of the Brussels-based European Policy Centre think tank, said the proposals for Gaza and Ukraine show a kind of “naivete by believing that by intervening at that level, by imposing your will on something like this, that you will reach some form of long-term conclusion.”

He said both proposals reflect Trump’s political and personal self-interest.

“In the end, the focus is solely on what Trump thinks he will get out of this in terms of reputation and money,” Zuleeg said.

Each Trump administration plan to end the wars heavily favor one side.

The Trump plan for Gaza leans to Israeli terms. It makes disarming Hamas a central condition for any progress in rebuilding the devastated territory. It also lays out no strict timetable for a full Israeli troop withdrawal, making it conditional on deployment of an international security force.

For Russia and Ukraine, Witkoff looked to open peace plan talks with terms skewing toward Russia. He quietly hosted Kirill Dmitriev, a close ally of Putin’s, for talks in south Florida to help launch the plan that opened talks in Geneva, according to a senior administration official and a U.S. official familiar with the matter who were not authorized to comment publicly and spoke on the condition of anonymity. The White House insists that the plan was U.S.-authored with input from both the Ukrainians and Russians.

But that’s where the similarities end. The differences are buy-in — and Putin

The draft that was formally presented to Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky decidedly favored the Russians, with no European input. In contrast, the Gaza ceasefire talks got buy-in from Egypt, Qatari, Jordanian, Saudi and other regional powers.

The 28-point Russia-Ukraine plan called for Ukraine to give up land in the industrial Donbas region that the Russians currently don’t control and dramatically shrink the size of its military. It also effectively gave Russia oversight of both NATO and EU expansion. The draft has narrowed by a few points since it was first presented, and Trump is sending his envoys on a bit of shuttle diplomacy to “sell it,” as he said. He said Witkoff will visit Moscow next week — perhaps joined by his son-in-law, Jared Kushner, who was also involved in the Gaza plan. Army Secretary Dan Driscoll will meet with the Ukranians.

European leaders worried that Trump is leaving them out of high-level discussions and vulnerable to Russian aggression.

“He appears perfectly ready to sacrifice Ukraine’s security and Europe’s in the process,” Hannah Neumann, a German member of the European Parliament, said of Trump on Tuesday.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu resisted Trump’s pressure to agree to a ceasefire, for a time. But Putin refuses to concede anything on Ukraine.

He’s appeared to be considering the matter, notably when Trump rolled out a red carpet for the Russian leader at a summer summit in Alaska — an old front line of the Cold War. Trump left without an agreement from Putin to end the bloodshed. The Russian leader walked off with long-sought recognition on the world stage.

To the horror of Ukraine and the vexation of Trump, Putin has stood firm.

As the envoys flew home from Geneva last week without any agreement, the White House scrambled to explain. One U.S. official argued that the 28-page plan, which calls on Ukraine to cede the Donbas region and bar Ukraine from joining NATO, represents considerable concessions from Putin because he would be agreeing to give up on his claim, once and for all, that all of Ukraine should be part of Russia.

Putin, the official noted, has long grumbled that the West doesn’t respect Russia’s position in the global world order. The official added that the Trump White House in its approach is not affirming Putin’s position but trying to reflect the Russian perspective is given its due in the emerging peace plan.

It’s not for the administration to judge Putin’s positions, the official said, but it does have “to understand them if we want to get to a deal.”

Kellman, McNeil and Madhani write for the Associated Press. McNeil reported from Brussels and Madhani from Washington. AP writer Lee Keath in Cairo contributed to this report.

Nov. 26 (UPI) — Amid a U.S.-push to end the war in Ukraine, Special Envoy Steve Witkoff will travel to Moscow next week for talks on a proposed peace deal, the Kremlin said Wednesday.

The announcement from Putin’s foreign policy adviser Yuri Ushakov, who said preliminary agreement for the visit had been struck, came a day after Ukraine said it had reached a “common understanding” with the White House on a revised version of a 28-point plan floated by Trump last week.

Ushakov said Putin would “definitely” meet with Witkoff if he came, the state-run Tass news agency reported, on what would be his sixth visit to the Kremlin in nine months.

However, he said Russia was not in formal receipt of the peace plan for Ukraine, but had a copy obtained unofficially.

Ushakov said there were several versions, which caused some confusion, but said he believed “we have some of the latest versions.”

Speaking to reporters aboard Air Force One on Tuesday night, Trump said the plan had been “fine-tuned, with additional input from both sides,” and that they were going to keep talking.

“They’re talking about [exchanging] land going both ways and cleaning up the border,” he said, adding that frontiers that ran through a house or the middle of a highway or a town were not feasible, making nailing down final details a complex process “that doesn’t go that quickly.”

Trump said the issue of security guarantees was being worked out with the Europeans, whom he said would be involved to a very significant degree.

He said that while he wanted an agreement finalized quickly, there was no longer a deadline.

“I don’t have a deadline. You know what the deadline for me is? When it’s over.”

Trump had originally set a deadline of Thursday for Ukraine to sign the original deal drawn up with Russia, which he now said was not a plan but a roadmap or “a concept.”

Trump said that Witkoff might be accompanied on the trip by Jared Kushner, Trump’s son-in-law, but said that had yet to be confirmed. He confirmed Kushner, a key player in getting Trump’s Gaza peace plan over the line last month, was involved in the process.

News of Witkoff’s visit came after a leaked transcript of a call with Ushakov in which he appeared to coach his Russian counterpart on how to get on the good side of Trump.

Trump dismissed suggestions that Witkoff was favoring Russia, saying that while he hadn’t heard what had been said, it sounded like typical negotiation tactics and that other members of his team would be doing the same with Ukraine.

“He’s got to sell this to Ukraine. He’s got to ‘sell’ Ukraine to Russia. That’s what a dealmaker does. You got to say, ‘You got this, they want this. You got to convince them of this.’ You know, that a very standard form of negotiation,” said Trump.

US President Donald Trump is sending senior negotiators to meet Vladimir Putin to push for a deal to end Russia’s war with Ukraine. Special envoy Steve Witkoff is expected to travel to Moscow next week, with Jared Kushner also involved in the process.

WASHINGTON — Director of National Intelligence Avril Haines told lawmakers Tuesday morning that Russian President Vladimir Putin did not expect the level of Ukrainian resistance to his invasion, nor the level and speed of sanctions imposed by countries around the world.

“Our analysts assess that Putin is unlikely to be deterred by such setbacks and instead may escalate, essentially doubling down,” she said.

The comments from Haines and other intelligence officials came in an unusually candid public hearing with members of the House Intelligence Committee. The hearing was expected to focus on the intelligence community’s annual global threat assessment, but it was instead largely dominated by questions about Russia’s two-week-old invasion of its neighbor Ukraine. The House panel will get a classified assessment in the afternoon.

Haines said Putin likely expected the conflict to last a matter of days at most and predicted Russia will be hard pressed to hold any ground it gains.

“We assess Putin feels aggrieved the West does not give him proper deference and perceives this as a war he cannot afford to lose, but what he might be willing to accept as a victory may change over time given the significant costs he is incurring,” she said.

CIA Director William Burns agreed, saying Putin initially believed Ukraine was weakened and easily intimidated, and that the Russian leader had modernized his military to the point of ensuring a quick victory. Burns added that Putin had been confident early on that he had sanction-proofed his economy, and that the Europeans were too distracted to pay much attention to the invasion.

“He’s been proven wrong on every count,” Burns said.

Still, Burns said the invasion is a “matter of deep personal conviction” for Putin.

“He has been stewing in a combustible combination of grievance and ambition for many years,” Burns said.

Putin’s plan was premised on seizing Kyiv within the first two days of the campaign, Burns said, and he is getting increasingly frustrated at the lack of progress.

“He’s likely to double down and try to grind down the Ukrainian military with no regard for civilian casualties,” Burns said. “He has no sustainable political endgame in the face of what is going to continue to be fierce resistance from Ukrainians.”

At this point, Burns said he cannot see how Putin can stand up a puppet regime in the face of massive opposition from the Ukrainian people, warning there is an “ugly next few weeks” ahead.

Defense Intelligence Agency Director Lt. Gen. Scott Berrier estimated that 2,000 to 4,000 Russian soldiers have died in the less than two weeks since the invasion began, a number that far exceeds what the Russian government has acknowledged. For context, the United States suffered more than 7,000 military deaths over two decades in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Berrier said Russia appears to be attempting to cut off food and water to Kyiv as a strategy.

“It will become somewhat desperate in I would say 10 days to two weeks,” he said.

Intelligence Committee Chairman Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Burbank) told reporters after the hearing that as Putin doubles down on Ukraine, it remains difficult to see how the conflict ends.

“What’s the offramp? I think what we can do is just to continue to escalate the price that he and Russia have to pay for this,” Schiff said. “I think until he feels that his own regime is at risk, it’s hard to see him looking for an exit ramp.”

Congressional lawmakers are debating how much additional aid to send to Ukraine, and what additional economic measures to take against Russia, which is already seeing unprecedented sanctions on its financial systems, top leaders and businesses. On Tuesday, President Biden announced a ban on the import of Russian oil and energy products into the United States.

Senate Majority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D-N.Y.) has called for some $12 billion in aid, and urged passage this week, saying it “will provide both humanitarian and military assistance for Ukraine: funding for refugees, medical supplies, emergency food supplies, as well as funding to support weapons transfers into Ukraine, and help for our eastern flank NATO allies.”

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco) has said Congress is looking to pass $10 billion in emergency aid for Ukraine as part of a larger government funding measure. A vote could occur as soon as today.