Putin Explains Current Negotiation Status – Either Ukraine Concedes Diplomatically, or We Will Win Militarily

Conservative Treehouse 

On the sidelines of a trade and economic discussion with the govt of Kyrgyzstan and the CSTO summit, Russian Federation President Vladimir Putin took questions from media about the Ukraine -vs- Russia conflict.

Now, due to the significance of his remarks, and keeping in mind these responses are in the Russian language, it becomes important for WESTERN READERS to evaluate the translation.  Vladimir Putin speaks in direct terms that are often not understood in western translation, the nuance within the translation is important.

That said, I am going through the remarks; I will share the video and ongoing translation while extrapolating against the known backdrop of communication as shared by Secretary of State Marco Rubio, Emissary Steve Witkoff and ultimately, President Donald Trump.

It appears that Russian President Putin is expecting the arrival of a U.S. delegation to Moscow, likely Witkoff, Saturday, Sunday or Monday (early next week).  This aligns with the prior statements of President Trump during remarks aboard Air Force One.

In general, and in the specifically official nuance that Russian President Vladimir Putin is known for, Putin affirmed that Steve Witkoff and Yury Ushakov are key “informal” negotiators. Each emissary from each leader allowed space for plain language discussions.  Witkoff represents the voice of Donald Trump, and Ushakov representing the voice of Vladimir Putin.

Witkoff and Ushakov can meet and discuss the reality of things without concern for the noise of diplomatic stakeholders. Both men are closely trusted advisors of their principals, Trump and Putin.  When the elements of their discussions need to transfer to formal contexts, Witkoff/Trump bring aboard Secretary Rubio while Ushakov/Putin bring in Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov.  The official teams transfer the common language objective into diplomatic details.

As to the status of the current conflict from the Russian perspective.  Vladimir Putin was brutally honest and pragmatic in his remarks.

Yes, the aforementioned 28-point plan was the aligned discussion agreement between Putin/Ushakov and Trump/Witkoff.  That plan was then broken down into four component groups by Secretary Rubio and the Ukrainian delegation; that agreement now boiled down to 19 key points with elements of the EU security stuff removed to focus specifically on the Russia -v- Ukraine conflict.

The difference between the 19-point current plan and the originating 28-point plan is essentially the aspects where European Leaders are worried about their fantasy projection of Russia attacking Europe.  These are elements that Vladimir Putin says are completely nonsensical because there simply is no intention; however, if the U.S/NATO/EU want to frame or format a diplomatic agreement to affirm some sort of non-attack, no-conflict treaty, then yes Russia is open to that type of an agreement but separate from the specific issues of Ukraine v Russia.

The Russian position is pragmatic, and it makes sense.  Additionally, talks of Russia rejoining the G-7 (becoming G8 again) or whatever aspects the EU/USA want to discuss are open, economic, trade, financial, diplomatic, etc. etc. are welcome and accepted but distinctly not related to the current Ukraine issue.

Putin says his position on the agreement to end the Ukraine conflict is clear, either Ukraine concedes territory and pulls remaining troops back from current war zones, or Russia will continue to advance and defeat them militarily.   At this point in the discussion, Putin goes into remarkably granular detail about the situation on the ground.  WATCH:

As noted by Putin the Russian Federation troops have surrounded multiple Donbas territories and are defeating what he considers the most hardline Ukraine Nazi regime elements.  Either the Nazi opposition retreats from the regions where they are about to be crushed (in the pointed peace plan, geographic “concessions”) or they will eventually be killed.  There is no alternative to the reality of the situation.

Now, without support from the USA and NATO, this Nazi resistance cannot exist; this forms the baseline for the negotiated settlement as presented and discussed between Ushakov and Witkoff, translated into terms by Rubio and Lavrov, and communicated with Ukraine leadership.

The EU, U.K and European NATO leadership (sans some pragmatic elements in Europe), together with U.S. political elites, are willing to continue funneling weapons systems and arms to the Ukrainian forces, motivated by other political and financial stakeholder interests that are not connected to the reality of the situation on the ground.  This is the group opposed to what Rubio/Witkoff and Lavrov/Ushakov have been attempting diplomatically (see leaks and other negotiating undermining efforts).  Segment #2 Prompted:

As long as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy continues to be influenced by those who are opposed to a negotiated settlement, Russia will continue grinding forward to win militarily.  If, however, the Zelenskyy regime accepts the reality of the situation, in part driven by President Trump’s threat to cut off support regardless of domestic political pressure, then Ukraine can withdraw from those areas they are about to lose and finalize terms for future peace and security.

The full video is below, with audio translation that does not necessarily align accurately with the transcript of what Vladimir Putin is saying, yet still worth watching in FULL.

Pavel Zarubin: Good afternoon. Pavel Zarubin, Rossiya TV Channel.

The principal global topic of recent days has been the Trump peace plan. Naturally, we have many questions for you.

To what extent does the draft initially published unofficially take our position into account? Have we received an amended version of the document following negotiations between the United States and Ukraine? Consequently, when will Russian-American negotiations begin – which, as we understand, have not yet taken place regarding this document? When will Steve Witkoff visit you? What is your current assessment of the prospects for a peaceful settlement? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Regarding the draft agreement. There was no draft agreement per se; rather, there was a set of issues proposed for discussion and finalisation. In general, I have spoken about this on numerous occasions. Prior to my visit to the United States, before the trip to Alaska, we discussed this with American negotiators, and subsequently, a list of 28 potential points for an agreement was formulated. As I have already stated publicly, it was conveyed to us through certain channels, and we examined it.

Thereafter, negotiations were held in Geneva between the American and Ukrainian delegations. They, as I understand it, decided among themselves that all these 28 points should be divided into four separate components. All of this was passed on to us.

In general, we agree that this could form the basis for future agreements. However, it would be inappropriate for me to speak now of any final versions, as these do not exist.

Certain matters are of a fundamental nature, and overall, we observe that the American side is, in some respects, taking our position into account – the position that was discussed before Anchorage and after Alaska. There are, unquestionably, areas where we need to sit down and engage in serious discussions on specific points, and all such matters must be framed in proper diplomatic language. Because, generally speaking, one thing is to say that Russia does not intend to attack Europe. To us, that sounds ridiculous, does it not? We never had any such intentions. But if they want to have it formalised, let’s do it, no problem.

It is simply that there are individuals there – I believe they are either not entirely of sound mind or are a certain type of swindler – who seek to gain from this by publicly telling their population, their citizens, that Russia is preparing to attack Europe and that they must urgently strengthen their defence capabilities. Either they are serving the interests of the defence industry and private companies, or they are attempting to bolster their domestic political ratings against the backdrop of the dire state of their economies and social spheres. It is difficult to say what motivates them, but from our point of view, it is complete nonsense – an outright falsehood. Nevertheless, if this narrative has taken root in their public consciousness, if they have frightened their citizens who now wish to hear that we have no plans – no aggressive intentions – towards Europe, then very well, we are ready to formalise that in any manner they see fit.

Perhaps there is even merit in this, considering that we all wish to talk, to discuss, and to articulate matters of pan-European security. Probably so; we ourselves proposed this at one point. If our Western – let us once again call them “partners” – now want this, then very well, we are ready. But we all understand that this requires serious discussion, as every word carries significance.

Or, for example, one of the documents mentions that we should resolve the issue of strategic stability together with our American partners. For heaven’s sake – are we opposed to that? That is precisely what we proposed, having even suggested to the Obama administration that we should agree on certain matters. The response was, “Yes, yes,” and then, a month before the Obama administration left the White House, everything stalled. Now another treaty – New START – is expiring in February. If they do not wish to do anything, so be it.

From these papers, we see that, overall, there is a desire to revisit these issues. However, each of these issues is a separate, very serious area. We are certainly prepared for this serious discussion. Next week, an American delegation is due to arrive in Moscow.

Olga Matveyeva: Olga Matveyeva, Mayak and Vesti FM radio stations.

As a follow-up on the colleague’s question. Will you please name the main Russian negotiators?

And one more thing. There were reports on talks underway in Abu Dhabi. Does it mean a concurrent process is going on there? Could you tell us who is talking to whom and what is happening there? Thank you.

Vladimir Putin: Obviously, the negotiator from the Russian side is the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. When we really sit down at the negotiating table and start discussing each of the proposed items in substance and in detail, the Foreign Ministry – on our part, from the Presidential Executive Office – Vladimir Medinsky, Aide to the President who has been engaged in that from the outset. I also included my Aide, Yury Ushakov, to deal with current issues, to organise all this work, he is in touch with his American counterparts. But he cannot deal with all of this alone – the Foreign Ministry must step in and to some extent, the Presidential Executive Office. This is a big, very extensive set of issues that need to be discussed, formalised, and properly spelled out.

That is the way it should be done, I think. It’s not that I think so, but it is never done any other way.

As for the Abu Dhabi talks, yes, I have heard some information noise on this score. But there was nothing unusual, nothing secret happening there either. Our secret services, Russian and Ukrainian, have always been in contact with each other, even in the hardest times. And they are in contact now. What are they dealing with? They are resolving a number of humanitarian issues, primarily related to the exchange of prisoners of war. The Abu Dhabi platform is actively used for this purpose. We are very grateful to the President of the United Arab Emirates for the opportunities extended to us. Thanks to his efforts, hundreds of our men, our heroes, have returned to their homeland.

At the initiative of the Ukrainian side, one of such regular meetings was scheduled and took place in Abu Dhabi. On our side, one of Russia’s FSB leaders attended it. A representative of the US administration also came to this meeting. It was a bit unexpected for us, but we never give up on contacts. He spoke with the Russian representative and wondered if perhaps we should not wait until next week to continue contacts but rather hold a meeting in Moscow this week.

I only learnt about this when the plane landed in Bishkek, but nevertheless, I said that we were ready, you are welcome, at any time. The issue is so important for everyone and for us that at any time of the day or night – we will arrive tonight, we will return, so we can meet right on Thursday, or Friday, Saturday, Sunday – whenever they want. But we agreed that we would decide, and the administration of the US President would decide who should arrive and when.

The latest information was brought to my attention yesterday that President Trump had decided that, after all, as previously agreed – and there was such an agreement earlier – the meeting is proposed by the American side to be held in Moscow next week. OK, we are always open.

As to who will represent the United States from the American side, this should, of course, be determined by the President of the United States. Therefore, we are expecting them in the first half of the next week.

Andrei Kolesnikov: Andrei Kolesnikov, Kommersant daily.

Mr President, are you going to insist that the territorial issue, above all in Donbass, should be resolved here and now, and for good? Or, will you agree to postpone it, so to speak, until better days? One more question, with your permission: would you agree to return to G7, the Group of Eight, as one of the peace plan versions provides; that is, to all those people?

Vladimir Putin: As for G7 or G8, we have never asked to be there, we were invited there once and we worked there. It was a platform for coordinating certain positions. I must say, you know, please take note, even before the tragic events in Ukraine began, I stopped travelling there. Did you notice?

Remark: Yes, indeed.

Vladimir Putin: This is why, when the developments in Ukraine began, they said: “Well, we are not expecting you there.” And good riddance… I do not remember who it was, I think it was the Prime Minister who went there once. The first time I refused was because really, I do not invent anything, it was when the Government was formed after I was elected President, I think in 2012. However, we never reject contacts, we are always open for interaction. First, nobody invites us there, I have not heard of or received any official proposals. And second, we know how the great majority of that association, called the Big Seven, and I have already said it once that I do not quite understand why it is called the big seven: in terms of territory, population and contribution to the global GDP they are getting smaller and smaller. Well, it does not matter, they are our important partners anyway. In today’s situation I just cannot imagine how we can interact directly. Can you imagine it? Well, we’ve arrived, hello, and now we will be stare at each other, or what?

I believe that this should bring us to some normalisation. Maybe, if we implement all these proposals within the list that we have received from the US administration, maybe some conditions for bilateral or multilateral contacts will emerge, however, it is premature to speak about it.

Andrei Kolesnikov: And there was the second question …

Vladimir Putin: You know, I will tell you now very briefly, I think it will be clear at once what it is all about. We are still receiving proposals about ceasing hostilities there, there and there. When the Ukrainian troops leave the territories they occupy, then the hostilities will cease. If they do not leave, we will achieve it militarily. That’s that.

Yes, please.

Transcript – To be continued.