The discussions in Geneva, Switzerland, were expected to focus on Ukrainian-held territory in the east that Russia wants to control as the price of peace. Kyiv has said that demand is a nonstarter.
Russia’s top negotiator, Vladimir Medinski leaving the Intercontinental hotel in Geneva on Tuesday.Credit…
Ukrainian, Russian, and American officials reconvened on Wednesday for a second day of trilateral talks, the latest in a string of negotiations aimed at securing a peace deal that has proved elusive.
Rustem Umerov, Ukraine’s lead negotiator and the secretary of the country’s National Security Council, wrote on social media that the new round of talks in Geneva, Switzerland, began shortly after 09:30 a.m. local time. As he and Russian negotiators concluded the first day of discussions on Tuesday, they offered no public sign of progress.
President Volodymyr Zelensky of Ukraine said Tuesday’s meetings “were indeed difficult, and we can state that Russia is trying to drag out negotiations that could already have reached the final stage.” He did not elaborate on the sticking points, but Ukrainian officials had earlier voiced concern about the return of Vladimir Medinsky, a Kremlin aide known for his hard-line stance, to lead the Russian negotiating team.
Mr. Umerov said on Wednesday that the discussions would proceed in separate tracks covering political and military issues. He did not specify the agenda, but the talks were expected to focus on the fate of Ukrainian-held territory in the east that Moscow wants under its control as the price for ending the war — a demand that Kyiv has said is a nonstarter.
It is one of two main obstacles to a peace deal, along with the question of postwar Western security guarantees for Ukraine to deter any future Russian invasion.
Mr. Zelensky has signaled openness to compromising on the territorial issue, suggesting a demilitarized zone in Donetsk, where both Ukrainian and Russian troops would pull back from an equal portion of territory. But he has also made clear that any territorial compromise would come only after Ukraine secures firm security guarantees from its Western allies, above all the United States.
That is why the question of territory and security guarantees is tightly interconnected, analysts say. Whichever is resolved first could determine which of the warring sides gains the upper hand in the negotiations, they add.
“The sequencing matters a lot,” said Harry Nedelcu, a senior director at Rasmussen Global, a research organization.
“The U.S. wants Ukraine to make territorial concessions first, and only then would Washington give Kyiv security guarantees,” Mr. Nedelcu said. “This risks putting Kyiv in a trap. Russia would use the pause to launch another attack.”
That concern is particularly acute for the portion of Donetsk still under Ukrainian control. The area is heavily fortified, so surrendering it, or even withdrawing from it as part of a demilitarized zone, could give Russia a strategic foothold to resume attacks.
“But if you have security guarantees first,” Mr. Nedelcu added, “it gives Ukrainians bargaining power at the negotiating table and assures Kyiv of international protection to deter another invasion.”
In that case, Kyiv could negotiate from a position of confidence, knowing its postwar security would be protected. Strong guarantees might even persuade Ukrainians to accept territorial concessions, an idea that is beginning to gain traction among the local public.
Mr. Zelensky has said the United States and Ukraine have agreed on postwar security guarantees, though details have not been disclosed. European diplomats in Kyiv remain skeptical that the guarantees are fully locked in. That has raised concerns that the talks in Switzerland, by focusing on territory while security commitments are not yet in place, may be premature.
Mr. Zelensky hinted at this concern in a social media post this week.
“Our American friends, they are preparing security guarantees. But they said — first this swap of territories, or something like that, and then security guarantees,” he wrote on X. “I think — first, security guarantees. Second, we will not give up our territories because we are ready for compromise. What kind of compromise are we ready for? Not for the compromise that gives Russia the opportunity to recover quickly and come again and occupy us.”
