By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Ukraine and the UAE formalized an economic partnership agreement on Monday, establishing free trade. President Zelenskyy’s subsequent trip to Turkey and Saudi Arabia is unrelated to concurrent U.S.-Russia talks in Riyadh, though he intends to inquire about their progress. While Zelenskyy supports European involvement in future negotiations to pressure Russia for peace, both Moscow and Washington have rejected this proposal, citing differing priorities for their bilateral discussions. The Kremlin emphasized that its focus is on rebuilding U.S.-Russia relations and laying the groundwork for potential Ukraine negotiations.
Read the original article here
Ukraine will not participate in any talks between Russia and the United States regarding the ongoing conflict. This decision, announced by President Zelenskyy while in the UAE, reflects a deep-seated concern that such discussions fundamentally disregard Ukraine’s sovereignty and its central role in the conflict. It feels, as Zelenskyy might put it, like two neighbors discussing how to rearrange his front garden without even consulting him, let alone the rest of the street.
Ukraine’s exclusion from these potential negotiations raises serious questions about the very nature of the discussions. Why should the US, or indeed any other nation, participate in deciding the future of a country without that country’s direct involvement? Such an approach risks perpetuating the very power imbalances that allowed this conflict to begin in the first place.
The argument for US involvement rests on a crucial principle: the international community’s obligation to prevent a nation from forcibly annexing another’s territory. Failure to defend this principle firmly now carries immense risks. The precedent set by allowing Russia to seize Ukrainian land could embolden similar actions against other nations, potentially sparking conflicts elsewhere. A failure to act decisively could trigger future crises, jeopardizing the security of American allies such as Taiwan and South Korea. The long-term consequences of inaction far outweigh any perceived short-term benefits of a deal that compromises Ukraine’s interests.
The involvement of certain figures within the US political landscape further complicates matters. Some within the US political system seem to prioritize narrow, short-sighted gains, potentially jeopardizing long-term stability and undermining the very principles of international cooperation. This disregard for the established global order, built after the devastation of World War II, is deeply alarming. The principles of sovereignty and self-determination, enshrined in international law, are being actively undermined.
The fact that these potential talks are even being considered without Ukraine’s full participation reflects a troubling disregard for the basic tenets of international diplomacy. It echoes historical events where nations were effectively carved up without their consent, leading to disastrous consequences. This echoes the sentiment that Ukraine refuses to attend a dinner party to which it wasn’t invited, a party where its future is being decided without its voice.
Furthermore, the suggestion that only Russia and the US should be involved is fundamentally flawed. The war in Ukraine is not just a bilateral issue; it has far-reaching implications for European security and the global order. The EU, which has provided significant support to Ukraine, and other affected nations, should absolutely be included in any meaningful negotiations. The current proposal not only ignores Ukraine but also overlooks the substantial contributions and shared concerns of other nations impacted by the conflict.
Many commentators express strong skepticism towards the motivations behind these proposed talks, particularly regarding the potential influence of certain political figures and their perceived short-sighted priorities. There is a growing concern that these efforts are driven by a desire to serve self-interest above all else, at the expense of international stability and the self-determination of nations. The potential for political gamesmanship and prioritizing personal gain over broader principles raises significant alarms.
The very idea of Russia and the US holding discussions about Ukraine without Ukraine’s participation is deeply troubling. The potential benefits are dubious, while the risks of undermining global stability are substantial. The suggestion that Russia should participate at all without demonstrating a willingness to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity is highly questionable. The continued lack of respect for the basic tenets of international law is a serious concern for global stability. Ukraine’s firm stance of refusing to participate in these talks is entirely understandable and should be supported.