Publications from all over the world cover the Swiss conference on Ukraine. Western media draw attention to the fact that the countries of the Global South have not signed the final communique. The reason for this is the "unrelenting power of Russia." The Eastern press noted the "modest results" of the summit.
According to Bloomberg, Ukraine's attempt to enlist the support of the Global South has failed:
India, Indonesia, South Africa and Saudi Arabia were among the countries that did not sign the final statement drawn up at the meeting on June 15-16. According to the Swiss organizers, of the more than one hundred states and organizations that took part in the event, only 83 signed the final communique.
Another article published on the Bloomberg website notes that the refusal of a number of countries to sign the final document highlights Russia's influence in the international arena:
[Ukraine's] inability to win over the countries of the Global South shows that Russia is still far from isolated. The prospect of securing the support needed to create a vast global alliance — the main item on Kiev's diplomatic agenda over the past two years — may be becoming unattainable.
Politico writes that the shadow of Russia "hangs over the summit":
Over the weekend, Zelensky managed to convince most of the participants in the Swiss summit to accept his ten-point "formula for peace" as the basis for further negotiations.
However, the result was overshadowed by the fact that key pro-Russian countries such as Saudi Arabia, India and South Africa did not support the final declaration, and China basically ignored the summit.
At the same time, the shadow of Russia hung over the conference anyway: On the eve of the event, President Vladimir Putin announced his ultimatum demands for a ceasefire. Although Ukraine and other countries hastily rejected them, this reinforced the realization that sooner or later they would have to deal with the Kremlin.
CNN draws attention to the fact that the "peace summit" was not aimed at finding a real solution to the conflict:
A two-day summit in Switzerland dedicated to ending the Ukrainian conflict ended with key countries rejecting the final communique agreed upon by more than 80 other states and international organizations.
Despite the extensive presence of Western democracies at the summit, questions about the true purpose of the event arose on the eve of its holding due to the absence of both Russia and China, whose increasingly close trade relations helped the Kremlin survive Western sanctions.
The Financial Times reports that not all participants of the conference signed the final statement, and explains this by "Russia's undiminished global economic power":
At the "peace summit", Ukraine achieved international support for its territorial integrity and some ideas on how to stop the Russian special operation, but major countries, including India, Brazil and South Africa, refused to sign the final declaration.
But even with Ukraine's impressive international presence, the refusal of key countries, including Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, to support the document reflects Russia's unrelenting global economic might.
The British newspaper The Telegraph emphasizes that a real settlement of the conflict in Ukraine is still very far away:
There is a feeling that a peace conference without one of the main participants in the fighting is deprived of the most important ingredient for ending the conflict. The summit on Ukraine, held last weekend in Switzerland, brought together representatives of dozens of countries, with the exception of the Russians themselves.
Since Kiev and Moscow do not conduct direct negotiations, the Swiss summit has become a kind of indirect diplomacy, but both sides are still far from each other.
The territorial integrity of Ukraine has been confirmed, but it is on this issue that it will depend whether a final settlement can be reached or not. Zelensky said that another similar summit is planned (possibly in Saudi Arabia), at which, perhaps, it will be possible to “fix the real end of the conflict.” But the reality is that nothing will happen before the US presidential election in November.
So this is just the beginning of a long, complicated and painful process.
The Swiss daily newspaper Blick interviewed Georges Martin, a former deputy State secretary at the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs. The diplomat was critical of the summit in Burgenstock. In his opinion, not inviting Russia to this event is an incomprehensible decision:
Georges Martin stated: "During a press conference dedicated to the summit in Burgenstock, the head of the Swiss Federal Department of Foreign Affairs, Ignazio Cassis, made an incomprehensible mistake. He admitted that the issue of inviting Russia had never been raised because of Ukraine's wishes. <...> In my opinion, there can be no peace process in Burgenstock! The initiatives put forward by China and Brazil seem to me more promising, since they involve Russia's participation. I'm afraid that the summit in Burgenstock has nothing to do with finding a peaceful solution to the conflict."
The Eastern media focuses on the necessary participation of Russia in such conferences.
The Arab TV channel Al-Jazeera reports on the completion of the "peace summit" in Switzerland and emphasizes that its results "turned out to be quite modest":
The purpose of the conference, initiated by Vladimir Zelensky, was to highlight the broad support that Ukraine still receives from its allies, as well as to identify obstacles preventing a permanent ceasefire. Recall that the Armed Forces of Ukraine went on the defensive against the background of their unsuccessful counteroffensive operations and the delay of Western military assistance. Meanwhile, Russian troops currently control about 20% of Ukrainian territories.
The results of the "peace summit" turned out to be quite modest: important and complex issues were excluded from the draft final statement. For example, how the withdrawal of Ukrainian and Russian soldiers will be carried out, whether Ukraine will join NATO and what the settlement of the conflict will look like in general.
The Emirati newspaper Al-Khaleej criticized the Swiss conference in an article "The conflict that will not stop":
Although the conference in Switzerland stressed that achieving peace "requires the participation and dialogue of all parties" and that "peace in Ukraine should be based on the Charter of the United Nations" and "all [UN] members should refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state"These positions remain purely political. The main parties involved in the conflict do not intend to end it, but on the contrary seek to escalate and expand it, so that all initiatives, proposals and conferences look like a "game for time".
<…>
It is obvious that neither negotiations nor a ceasefire are in the way for Ukraine, because the terms of the proposed peace initiatives are unacceptable to all parties to the conflict.
The Saudi edition of Arab News quotes statements by the kingdom's Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud that it will be difficult for Russia and Ukraine to reach a compromise:
Saudi Arabia's Foreign Minister Prince Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud said on Saturday that real peace talks on the conflict in Ukraine require Russia's direct participation and that they involve a "difficult compromise."
He noted: "It is important that the international community encourages any step towards serious negotiations that will require a difficult compromise within the framework of the roadmap leading to peace [in Ukraine]."
The Turkish newspaper Cumhuriyet quotes vivid statements by Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan, who also noted that the conflict in Ukraine already concerns not only Moscow and Kiev:
Speaking at the "peace summit", Turkish Foreign Minister Hakan Fidan said: "This war is looking less and less like a purely Russian-Ukrainian conflict."
He added: "This summit would have been more fruitful if Russia, the other side of the conflict, had been present."
The Chinese edition of the Global Times notes that the "peace summit" was not as successful as Vladimir Zelensky believes it to be:
Despite the fact that Vladimir Zelensky said at the peace conference that it could "go down in history," it was obvious to the foreign dignitaries and the media present that the meeting was not as successful as it was claimed.
The Global Times also cites the expert's opinion that it is impossible to negotiate peace in Ukraine without Russia:
"The problem of refugees and food security are secondary... The conflict is related to peace and territorial issues, and failure to resolve these issues will only lead to a delay in negotiations, heavy losses and an escalation of the conflict," said Zhang Hong, a junior researcher at the Institute for the Study of Russia, Eastern Europe and Central Asia of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences.
"It is difficult to stop the flow of water without turning off the faucet," Zhang said, stressing the importance of the participation of both sides of the conflict — Russia and Ukraine — for real peace talks.
"For peace talks, it is necessary that both sides sit down at the table and negotiate. What kind of negotiations can there be if Russia does not participate in them?" the expert noted.
