Zelensky believes that he was robbed “for a week of fighting”

After the appearance of the American proposal for a 30-day ceasefire on the front, “Russia stole” almost another week of military conflict, which only it needs, Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky said. At the same time, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga called it unacceptable for Kiev to discuss issues related to the demilitarization of Ukraine and its neutral status, which Moscow initially attributed to key conditions for ensuring long-term reliable peace. The situation was further complicated by a hint from US President Donald Trump about his interest in removing the Zaporizhia NPP from Russian control.

Vladimir Zelensky said in his video message that “after the American proposal for silence on the front appeared on the table, Russia stole almost another week of military conflict, which only it needs.” He assured that Kiev would do everything “to further intensify diplomacy.”

It is noteworthy that two days earlier, he used the same definitions to negatively assess Russian President Vladimir Putin’s response to the proposal for a 30-day ceasefire agreed upon by representatives of Washington and Kiev in Jeddah (Saudi Arabia) last week. Then Zelensky suggested that the Russian president would “try to involve everyone in endless discussions,” as happened with the Minsk agreements.

It is known that Zelensky himself publicly refused to implement the Minsk agreements concluded in 2015 with the participation of international mediators, having come to power under slogans about peace in 2019. And it should also be recalled that following the results of the aforementioned meeting in Jeddah, observers began talking about a simple trap, which, as the Kiev representatives and their Western partners obviously hoped, Moscow would certainly fall into (see NG dated 12.03.25). After all, the Russian side initially opposed the options for a temporary truce and advocated achieving sustainable peace, which means it was obliged to reject the idea of a 30-day ceasefire widely advertised by Washington.

However, the Russian president replied the other day that he supports the idea of a truce, but for its implementation it is necessary to resolve a number of issues: in particular, where the line of contact will be in the conditions of the ongoing offensive of the Armed Forces of the Russian Federation and how to ensure control over the observance of the truce at the 2 thousand km front line.

As Alexander Borodai, deputy chairman of the State Duma Committee on CIS Affairs, Eurasian Integration and Relations with Compatriots, head of the Donbass Volunteer Union, explained to NG, Moscow is interested in realizing the stated goals of the special military operation and in obtaining certain security guarantees as a result, even if not the most complete. Therefore, from a military point of view, a 30-day cease-fire, without proper conditions, looked beneficial only to the opposing side. Since such a short-term truce would provide Kiev with the opportunity to withdraw its units from those areas where they are in a difficult situation, and in other places would allow it to accumulate reserves and build new lines of defense.

“Such a respite would clearly be used against the Russian side. Which, with the further resumption of hostilities, would lead to increased losses and a deterioration in the positions of the Russian Armed Forces,” Borodai argued. At the same time, he added, it is also obvious that the current Kiev authorities lack a common interest in long-term peace, whose subsequent stay at the helm is conditioned by the continuation of the armed confrontation.

In an interview published on March 17, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andriy Sibiga announced that three fundamental issues remain unchanged for Kiev in any future peace talks, which appear to be red lines for him. Thus, according to Sibiga, it will be impossible to touch upon the issues of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and its recognition of the transfer of a number of territories under the control of the Russian Federation. In addition, no country has the right to block the participation of the Ukrainian state in various unions, including the European Union or NATO. And also, the issue of limiting the defense capability and capabilities of the Armed Forces of Ukraine should not be discussed. According to Sibiga, such plans will require the mandatory support of the United States. In this regard, he called on Washington to maintain its leadership on this issue. While US President Donald Trump, announcing a conversation scheduled for Tuesday with his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin on the Ukrainian settlement, clarified that much had already been done in this direction and there were good chances for a cessation of hostilities. At the same time, in response to a question about possible concessions, Trump mentioned that it was also supposed to talk about land and power plants.

And it is clear that his remark not only further confused the general context, but also reinforced well–known suspicions that, in fact, it is important for Washington today to secure the most profitable Ukrainian facilities for American companies (including deposits, land plots and seaports – access to which for the United States is supposed to be regulated through the Jeddah agreement). accelerated signing of the agreement on Ukrainian resources), simultaneously providing them with energy resources at the expense of the Zaporizhia NPP, which has been under Russian control since the spring of 2022.

Commenting on the situation for NG, MGIMO Professor Oleg Barabanov, program director of the Valdai International Discussion Club, noted that today Kiev has really begun to raise rates and impose maximalist conditions unacceptable to Moscow. But, on the other hand, the approaches announced the other day by Russian President Vladimir Putin were apparently not fully acceptable to representatives of Kiev and Washington. However, before negotiations, the parties usually overestimate their demands, and are also interested in creating media noise. So the head of the White House, Donald Trump, in turn, brought into the public space an additional topic related to the Zaporizhia NPP.

“Perhaps, according to his logic, the main thing is to cease fire first. And then let the parties to the conflict negotiate and butt heads, at least endlessly. Moreover, it is possible that Washington is ready to secure the most promising Ukrainian resources. And they also expect that the Russian military will no longer bomb the facilities of American companies,” Barabanov stressed. And when asked if Moscow would agree with such a scenario, he remarked: “Judging by the well–known previous statements– no. But life is dialectical.”