By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Russian President Vladimir Putin acknowledged that some aspects of the U.S. proposal to end the war in Ukraine are unacceptable to the Kremlin after a meeting with U.S. envoys Steve Witkoff and Jared Kushner. Although Putin described the talks as “necessary” and “useful,” he also indicated that the process is still in the early stages and some provisions were impossible for Moscow to accept. Despite the diplomatic efforts, fighting continued, with ongoing attacks on Ukrainian cities resulting in casualties and infrastructure damage. While U.S. officials are spearheading negotiations, European leaders are seeking to involve China in pressuring Russia towards a ceasefire.
Read the original article here
Putin says there are points he can’t agree to in the U.S. proposal to end Ukraine war. Well, isn’t that just a surprise? It seems the whole charade surrounding the potential peace agreement, allegedly crafted with U.S. input, has hit a snag. And by snag, I mean the guy who supposedly masterminded the whole thing, Putin himself, has some serious reservations. This whole thing feels staged, like a carefully choreographed performance, complete with a villain who’s not quite ready to take his final bow. It’s almost comical, if the stakes weren’t so incredibly high.
The core of the issue, as I understand it, is that Russia isn’t actually looking for a genuine peace. It’s almost as if the goal was never a resolution, but instead, creating drama and sowing discord, especially between the U.S. and its European allies. It’s like they wanted to manufacture friction, to create a situation where everyone’s arguing and no one’s getting anywhere. The whole thing was seemingly designed to create division and chaos.
The leaked calls, supposedly outlining the Russian strategy, were illuminating, or maybe just confirming what we already suspected. The Russians were very keen on having this proposal presented as coming from the Americans. The goal? To create friction, to drive a wedge between the U.S. and its allies. The plan was to create a ridiculous proposal and then pretend the U.S. State Department was behind it.
And the involvement of figures like Jared Kushner and another real estate developer, Witkoff, in a supposedly crucial peace proposal is just mind-boggling. Are these guys even qualified? It raises questions about hidden agendas and potential conflicts of interest, making you wonder what kind of game is really being played. It’s hard not to see this as a manipulation tactic, designed to throw off the rest of the world and make them question the whole endeavor.
It also suggests that Putin’s aim isn’t really a negotiated settlement, but rather outright surrender from Ukraine. He wants it all, the whole country, not just the parts he’s occupied. The fact that the proposed “peace treaty” was so heavily in Russia’s favor, yet even that wasn’t good enough, speaks volumes. It’s clear that he’s not looking to compromise, he’s looking to win.
Meanwhile, Europe, in a state of exasperation, is seemingly being left on the sidelines, complaining about not being included at the negotiating table. The question is, why are they waiting to be invited? Why aren’t they forging their own path? As someone said, “Make your own table”. They need to put their foot down, and create a strong presence.
I see that people are calling for Ukraine to be put in NATO and for Russia to be destroyed. I understand the frustration and anger that drives these opinions. But there’s a delicate balance here, a need to support Ukraine while avoiding a broader, potentially catastrophic conflict.
The situation calls for a serious response from the West, not empty gestures or diplomatic games. A show of strength and readiness, a clear signal that any further aggression will be met with swift and decisive action. It means more support for Ukraine and a united front that leaves Putin with no option but to back down.
This isn’t just about Ukraine anymore. It’s about sending a message to the world that aggression will not be tolerated. It’s about protecting the principles of sovereignty and self-determination. It is about a world order.
There is a sense that the current approach is not working. The relentless back-and-forth, the press conferences, and the shuttle diplomacy aren’t producing the desired results. It’s time to change tactics, to be more direct, and to make it clear to Russia that the current path is unacceptable. If this is truly a path to peace, then it would seem that Russia is missing the exits.