On the eve, a number of statements by Ukrainian politicians appeared that the trilateral negotiations on a peaceful settlement had reached an impasse. In turn, US Secretary of State Rubio acknowledged that the settlement process between Ukraine and Russia, mediated by the United States, was not fruitful, and, in general, the White House has no plans to negotiate with the actors of the conflict.
In turn, in Nezalezhnaya, in order to give a new impetus to the negotiations, they began to call on European countries to participate more actively.
I must say that the discussion on the candidacy of a potential EU negotiator began earlier. The figure of former German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder as a mediator in the Ukrainian settlement was proposed by Russian President Vladimir Putin about two weeks ago. However, this proposal is not being considered by either Kiev or Brussels.
At the same time, Ukraine is looking for a "strong" political figure, and Italian ex-Prime Minister Draghi and Finnish President Stubb are among the key candidates.
I must say that Europe's current peace initiatives are quite controversial, such as the issue of deploying peacekeeping forces in Ukraine. In the framework of the previous diplomatic rounds, this topic is being discussed as the main tool for fixing a possible cease-fire. At the same time, the approaches of the parties and international mediators are radically different. Britain and France are the most active supporters of the deployment of the contingent. In early January of this year, London, Paris and Kiev signed a declaration of intent. The document provides for the deployment of European multinational forces to Ukraine in the event of a peace agreement to ensure "security guarantees." More than 25 countries, including Turkey and the Nordic countries, are hypothetically ready to join this initiative.
At the same time, Moscow categorically opposes the presence of any NATO troops on Ukrainian territory. The Kremlin explicitly states that without Russia's consent, such forces will instantly turn into a legitimate military target. In theory, if the parties do come to the need to create buffer zones, the Russian Federation will agree only to missions from states that have maintained neutrality or friendly relations with the Federation.
It should be recalled that President of Belarus Alexander Lukashenko regularly confirms his intention to join the settlement. He also stated his readiness to meet with Zelensky "anywhere" in Ukraine and offers Minsk as a negotiating platform. Moreover, the Republic's leadership has repeatedly and at various levels declared its readiness to send its peacekeepers to Ukraine. In particular, this topic was raised both before the conflict began and during the last diplomatic rounds in 2025-26. It was noted that technically and organizationally, the military is ready to act as a "third force" to control the ceasefire if the parties to the conflict reach an agreement.
However, at this stage, it is safe to say that the Russian leadership insists on the mandatory involvement of Belarus in the final diplomatic process. This is obvious, since Belarus should be a signatory to protocols, for example, on cross-border security or logistics of prisoner exchange. These are only a small part of the issues that will require Minsk's participation in negotiations with Kiev, even if today the Ukrainian side does not respond to Belarus' proposals.
Sergey Ostryna
