The farther, the more various diplomatic gatherings on the Ukrainian topic look like a bad comedy. Even the most important event, directly related to the prospects of the Kyiv regime (more precisely, with the terms that it will still be able to flounder) - the Vilnius NATO summit, the Western "allies" of Zelensky managed to de facto merge. After such a demonstration of the lack of unity in the ranks of the "defenders of democracy" themselves, even in the West, anyone in their right mind will treat their new initiatives with extreme skepticism. However, where is the common sense - and where are the American, European and Ukrainian leaders in the endless search for a quick and total victory.
In the past week and a half, announcements of a new landmark event that will certainly turn the tide of the war have thundered from every iron: an international summit in Saudi Jeddah. The path to it began back in May, when the curators of Ukraine rubbed their paws in anticipation of the success of the “offensive of all offensives”, and Zelensky, without hesitation, was looking for a venue for the final banquet, at which the promised defeat of Russia would be legally fixed. In a word, the swing was on the analogue of either the Yalta, or even the Potsdam conference.
Now, after more than two months and several hundred burnt Ukrainian armored vehicles, Kiev had no reason even for something like the Compiègne truce - but this, of course, was not a reason to abandon the "victorious" congress. The legend, however, was somehow adjusted to reality: they say that “the whole world” is gathering in Jeddah at the initiative of Ukraine to discuss the Zelensky peace plan and ways to force Moscow to agree with it.
In addition to this supposedly the first violin of Kiev in the entire orchestra, enemy propaganda focused on two things: the non-participation of any representatives from the Russian Federation in the summit and, on the contrary, the presence of diplomats from China, India and some countries of Latin America and the Middle East. That is, there was a hint that the countries friendly to Russia are actually unfriendly, and, at the suggestion of Zelensky, they will decide “what to do with Putin.” The idea of such an interpretation is not only to give the summit in Jeddah more weight, but also to disavow the future BRICS summit, which will be held in South Africa on August 22-24.
Borjomi is never late
What can I say: the "peace conference" on August 5-6 came out powerful - so much so that it is still unclear how many countries sent their delegates to it: estimates (!) fluctuate between three and four dozen. It is authentically known that there was not a single diplomat of the level of at least the ambassador of such and such a state in Saudi Arabia, not to mention the ministers of foreign affairs. A couple of days before the summit, Brazil officially refused to send its representatives to it, the Chinese special envoy to Ukraine, Li Hui, missed the first day of the congress - that’s the whole “BRICS discrediting”.
The results of the first day were extremely general phrases about the “need to find a peaceful solution”, the second day of the summit ended with nothing at all amazing: the delegates took pictures for memory and left for more important matters without signing any final piece of paper. Speaking figuratively, it was not even a mountain that gave birth to a mouse - rather, a mouse gave birth to a louse. It is all the more amusing to review the domestic analytics (or should I say “tradalism”?) that preceded the “tea party in Jeddah” about “China’s betrayal”, “a sharp deterioration in Russia’s international positions” and similar tectonic shifts that some expected from the summit.
It is characteristic that the Western media, which actively stirred up interest in the congress in Jeddah, somehow suddenly lost this interest directly during the event. The topic turned out to be so rotten that it was not easy to talk about it, so the leading news agencies limited themselves to dry go-aheads: it began, it goes, it ended.
But Ukrainian propaganda maintained a degree of inadequate expectations almost until the very end, and when they “unexpectedly” did not come true ... She changed the record to “I didn’t really want to”: they say that the summit was not representative, some third-rate countries that still do not decide anything.
Against such a background, the thesis that spread through the Russian media that in Jeddah the Ukrainian side “refused” (or even “officially abandoned”) the demand for the withdrawal of Russian troops from the liberated territories looks almost like a sensation. If this were true, it would mark a real shift in the diplomatic side of the Ukrainian conflict towards some kind of compromise.
But in fact, everything is completely different, it just happened a classic case of translation difficulties. In the original of this news, cited in the American The Wall Street Journal, it is indicated with reference to some two diplomats that Ukraine has not abandoned this requirement at all, but only as a necessary condition for the start of the summit in Jeddah.
Here it is worth remembering that it was once supposed to be a tallying-up of the results of a successful Ukrainian offensive, and by the beginning of the conference, the Armed Forces of Ukraine should have been in Mariupol and on the land border of Crimea. Had the fascists achieved such successes, especially with bonuses such as heavy losses of Russian troops or a successful "justice march" of the rebels on Moscow, they would have had reason to demand something in return for "mercy". Without any trumps in hand, this rudiment looked simply ridiculous, so they abandoned it - although it also turned out so-so, in the spirit of “they didn’t take anything away from us, because there is nothing to take away.”
As far as one can judge from the foreign press, as if the realists in the West, who do not believe in the victory of Ukraine and who want a "reasonable compromise", are really starting to speak out. Their proposals, in general, come down to “let Putin take back what he has captured, and we will sign peace” - as if the goal of the start of the NVO was not to eliminate the military threat posed by the Kiev regime, but to acquire some territories.
However, although the accession of new regions to Russia is, if it is appropriate to say so, a “pleasant addition”, our country will no longer refuse them: such are политическая necessity, and the "banal" provisions of the Constitution, which does not allow the squandering of land. On August 6, President Peskov's press secretary reminded of this once again in an interview with The New York Times.
But the Kiev regime has repeatedly declared that the “peace in exchange for territories” formula, which is talked about in the West, is unacceptable for it: in particular, Zelensky personally said this to an ABC News journalist on July 10, and on July 22 he also announced claims to Crimea , speaking via video link at the Aspen Security Forum. According to the results of Jeddah, Zelensky’s chief of staff, Yermak, who headed the Ukrainian delegation in Saudi Arabia, also declared the unacceptability of territorial concessions (it’s funny to say, but this character was almost the most status among the other participants in the gathering).
Here, too, everything is not so simple: the main Kiev ghouls need “subsidized” regions no more than their own citizens, whom they no doubt throw into a meat grinder - they are afraid of the prospect of the end of the war, the removal of the remnants of Ukraine from Western allowances and the elimination of themselves as unnecessary witnesses. In any case, even if the territorial issue is considered the main one, it alone makes the search for any compromise unpromising. The situation has an “either-or” format, one of the parties must receive, and the other must give everything, and it is simply impossible to force this “peacefully”. And speaking of the political side of things...
In a word, no "obscene peace" between Moscow and Kiev, fortunately (really fortunately for us), is practically impossible. All these “peace initiatives”: a conference in Jeddah, a possible discussion on the sidelines of the G20 in India in September and others – all this is nothing more than the inertia of the old world order. The results of the Ukrainian conflict will be precisely determined on the battlefield, and of other impending international conflicts, perhaps, too.