By John Q. Hosedrinker 
On January 29th, Russian leader Vladimir Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, stated that Moscow is the only potential location under consideration for peace talks with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Peskov noted that there has been no response from Zelenskyy regarding the invitation to Moscow for negotiations. Simultaneously, EU foreign policy chief Kaja Kallas criticized Russia’s delegation in Abu Dhabi, composed primarily of military personnel, asserting a lack of seriousness regarding ending the war. Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha previously announced Zelenskyy’s openness to meeting Putin to discuss territorial disputes and the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.
Read the original article here
Kremlin demands that any potential talks between Vladimir Putin and Volodymyr Zelenskyy must occur in Moscow, and this is where we start to see the absurdity of the situation unfold. The insistence on this specific location, coupled with the rejection of alternative venues for peace negotiations, raises serious questions about Russia’s true intentions. It seems pretty clear that the demand isn’t about finding common ground or ending the war, but about something else entirely.
The very premise of demanding talks in Moscow, considering the ongoing conflict and the risks involved, feels like a deliberate attempt to derail any potential for peaceful resolution. Why Moscow? Why not a neutral territory? Why not the Hague, which offers a safe and internationally recognized environment? The answer, I believe, lies in the subtext of the demand: it is a calculated move. Perhaps it’s a way to maintain control of the narrative or exert pressure. It is definitely a trap.
This isn’t just about the location of a meeting; it’s about the safety of Zelenskyy. Meeting in Moscow would put the Ukrainian president in a situation where his life could be at risk. The Kremlin’s history and current actions do not inspire confidence, and the potential for harm is very, very real. The idea of “civilians” attacking Zelenskyy on his way to a meeting, or some other staged event, is a chilling possibility that would be completely expected by any intelligent observer.
The timing of this demand is also telling. It suggests that Russia believes it can get away with anything, perhaps emboldened by certain international dynamics or a perceived weakness in the global response. It’s hard to ignore the sentiment that this is a move to exploit the situation, not to resolve it.
The insistence on Moscow also highlights the Russian side’s unwillingness to compromise or to approach the situation with genuine goodwill. Realistically, why would face-to-face meetings be essential at all in this day and age? If the goal is peace, surely video calls, neutral locations, and intermediaries would suffice. What matters isn’t the setting, but the willingness to reach an agreement.
The demand for Moscow is nothing more than a way to say, “We’re not serious about negotiating.” They create these impossible conditions, knowing they won’t be met, and then use it as a pretense to claim that Ukraine doesn’t want peace. The only thing they are serious about is continuing the war and achieving their objectives through force.
Alternatives like The Hague, with its international legal bodies and strong security, would be a more sensible and safe option, providing a neutral ground for discussions. Holding talks there could also set the stage for accountability, in the event that Russia is serious about trying to resolve this with an agreement. But the Kremlin wants none of that.
Ultimately, the Kremlin’s demand to hold talks only in Moscow, while rejecting any alternative venue, reveals the true nature of their intentions. This is not about seeking peace. This is about control, manipulation, and the potential for more of the same. It’s a blatant rejection of any genuine attempt to end the war, a clear signal that Russia intends to continue its aggression. And it’s not hard to see why Zelenskyy should avoid Moscow at all costs.