From the Obozrevatel:
"This week, a decision is being made: is the world heading toward global war or will it finally find the will to stop it? Interview with Bessmertny
Roman Pryadun, December 18, 2025
The Berlin talks revealed the central dilemma of the moment: the West wants a quick result, Ukraine wants a high-quality and irreversible one, and Russia wants further war. Ukrainian diplomat and politician Roman Bessmertny shared his thoughts on these and other issues in an exclusive interview with OBOZ.UA.
– Volodymyr Zelenskyy noted: "We have not agreed to any territorial concessions." Meanwhile, the Americans are officially demanding the withdrawal of Ukrainian troops in exchange for security guarantees. American media, citing the White House, report that the Ukrainians have been given time to go home to "discuss proposals," and are expected in Miami at the end of the week. Another meeting is possible.
To begin with, I'd like to ask everyone to pay attention to the remark by Russian Foreign Minister Lavrov, who said that the Americans allegedly promised to return "Russian lands." What does this indicate? No such decisions were ever made, of course, and no one made any promises. But the topic itself was raised. And it was clearly raised both in Anchorage and during conversations with Whitkoff. This is already obvious, as it was once mentioned in an interview with Tucker Carlson, when he spoke with Whitkoff. In other words, the essence of the problem wasn't simply some abstract territories, say, the Donetsk region, part of which is now controlled by the Ukrainian Armed Forces, the legitimate Ukrainian government. It was about "Novorossiya." And rest assured: this is only an interim stage.
Now, talk is one thing, and facts and events are quite another. Given that I haven't seen and don't see peace as Moscow's option for resolving the situation, I understand perfectly well that Putin, in the current situation, is motivated by Donald Trump's efforts to take another step forward in the occupation of Ukraine. And this is only an interim stage.
Now let's temporarily put ourselves in the shoes of President Zelenskyy, who has enough facts not only to confirm what we've discussed repeatedly but also to look ahead. Clearly, intelligence has operational data on the Russian General Staff's developments, understands what operations will be planned next, and so on. In the current situation, Zelenskyy faces a choice: buy a ticket on an installment plan for two or three months, or not worry about it at all and simply accept that peace is fundamentally not on the horizon.
– But Ukraine and Europe aren't rejecting Trump's plan, continuing "peace talks." Is this to avoid irritating Trump, hoping for another epiphany?
This means that in fact a choice is made between tactical tools. The main thing is that this is a maneuver aimed at eliciting Moscow's response. After all, they are interested in capitulation, not any compromises, even those that would be painful for Ukraine. This has been obvious for a long time.
– Is there a chance of making Donald Trump even a formal mediator?
No. He's effectively in the Kremlin's hands, and the Kremlin is manipulating him. I've always supported the position we discussed back in the summer: the time had come to thank Trump for his participation and say: if you can help or sell, then do so. If not, please keep your advice to yourself. Because the maneuvers we're seeing now in Washington and Europe, if you read the primary sources and documents, aren't conducive to peace. They're encouraging the aggressor. He sees that he's succeeding in pressuring the situation through Trump and even some Europeans.
Please note: just a week ago, Europe, through Czech President Petr Pavel, declared that there would be no border changes because this is a war in Europe. But in the statement signed on the evening of December 15th by the leaders of individual European states and the EU, two positions emerged. The first was no border changes by force. The second was that the decision on the territories rests with President Zelenskyy and the people of Ukraine.
And Washington continues to pressure Ukraine. This means that all the illusions about "something human" that Chancellor Merz spoke of are groundless. There was, is, and will be nothing human there. Hoping for a compromise with Putin or his clique is pointless. In this situation, only force works.
"Peace through strength" has been the obvious answer from the very beginning. But if Trump interprets this as pressure on Ukraine, he's only accelerating the path to continental, and then global, war.
Today, we find ourselves at a point where, within a week, a decision is effectively being made: is the world heading toward global war or will it finally find the will to stop it? This is precisely what we're talking about.
– You said back in the summer that we should have thanked Donald Trump for all the good things and minimized his involvement in this process as much as possible. Why wasn't this done, and why does the Berlin talks once again give the impression that the most important thing is to keep Trump from getting irritated?
Some European leaders simply lack the political will to make such a decision. And, excuse me, but those familiar with the eve of the First and Second World Wars know very well: this isn't the first time Europe and the world have experienced such a moment. However, the solutions are readily available. The question isn't about preparing for war in 2030. The question is that we need to be prepared now.
Pay attention to the words of the new head of British intelligence. Taking office precisely at the time when meetings between Americans, Europeans, and Ukrainians were taking place in Europe, she stated absolutely clearly: this is Moscow's pressure to seize Ukraine now and then continue the war against Europe.
Is this accepted in Washington? Are European capitals accepted? No. The logic here is: if you haven't had your fill, you can't have your fill. The illusion is that this means a few more days of peace, a few more days without war. But in reality, this is not a reprieve. It is an invitation to the aggressor.
– Don't you think that's exactly what Trump is aiming for? For Putin to invade some European country. Then Europe would be colossally frightened, and Europe's dependence on the United States would become even greater.
For Donald Trump, a war in Europe is, if you will, a dream. He knows very well what the United States once relied on. It's no coincidence that the situation has escalated precisely when Trump began complaining that Europe has begun buying fewer American weapons. We've discussed this: modernizing the European defense industry and increasing domestic production will lead to Europeans stopping buying from the United States. And for him, whether the conflict is large or small doesn't matter. What matters to him is the dollar...
The "national security strategy" story has already triggered serious developments. Now Europe will have to make another choice. Either thank Trump for his efforts and say: keep your recommendations to yourself.
– But this decision must be pan-European. Will it be finalized?
That will depend on the decisions made in Brussels on December 18-19. We'll have some possible answers around Christmas, but not a final one. Because Trump continues to maneuver: he introduces tariffs, then delays them, then talks about sanctions against Lukoil, then delays them. The license to purchase Lukoil's foreign assets has already been delayed twice. But this only reveals Trump. It reveals the shadowy part of his dialogue with Moscow, which he doesn't want to discuss, but which is in fact key. And sooner or later, this information will surface. And then it will become the final argument for the rift between Europe and the United States on the issue of countering Russian aggression.
– The Ukrainian President noted that the United States wants to end the war quickly. They claim that 90% of the issues have already been agreed upon, leaving territories and security guarantees. According to Western media, the Americans have given Ukraine an ultimatum: here are your security guarantees, they're excellent, everyone's happy. If not, things will only get worse. Why is the United States in such a rush?
This is pure blackmail. All this rhetoric about "guarantees on the table"—take them or they'll disappear—is really just a smokescreen. The Ukrainian side, having announced about elections and NATO, proposed moving on to a substantive discussion of security guarantees. The Americans, however, are talking not about guarantees, but about assurances. And the entire discussion mentally harks back to 1994, to the configuration of the Budapest Memorandum. There's no talk of any real guarantees. That's precisely why the president is asking: if Russia attacks, which units and what exactly will you do?– And in response, zero specifics...
Exactly. So please take your 'platinum new guarantees' back where you got them. Because no guarantees exist today. Now imagine: they tell you to withdraw your troops from a fortified region that has a strategic advantage. Reduce your army. And we'll still have to think about what assurances to give you. That's precisely why Zelenskyy and the Ukrainian negotiating team are acting the way they are. They're demonstrating to Trump a constructive spirit and a willingness to engage in dialogue. This is an absolutely correct tactical move, so that both Whitkoff and Trump hear Russia's 'no.' But it won't be voiced publicly. Because then the whole theater will fall apart.
– So you believe there won't be any real security guarantees that could stop Russia's next invasion. Because if you look at it logically, the Americans are loudly saying, 'No NATO, we won't fight Russia, a nuclear power.' And then suddenly they're offering us guarantees that envision war with Russia, a nuclear power. Well, that seems strange, to put it mildly.
The Europeans themselves have already suggested everything. Their statements clearly state: the United States will monitor, manage the process, and provide information. You won't find the word "force" anywhere in them. No units. Not even a mention of air control. The entire force component is coming from Europe. So, it's clear to me: all these "platinum," "gold," and any other guarantees are just talk. It's just empty talk. And it's no coincidence that I'm recalling 1994. I remember that story very well...
– So all these positive statements – like, we’ve worked on something, there are security guarantees, Congress is ready to support it, to legally enshrine it – this, in essence, means nothing?
Absolutely. If they really wanted to provide guarantees, they would have taken the law on relations with Taiwan or Israel, put it on the table, changed the country's name, and that would be it. But that's not even being discussed. Somewhere they write about Senate ratification, somewhere else – Congress. This is all aimed at people who don't distinguish between assurances and guarantees. It's a play on words. There have been no guarantees from Trump, and there are none. He kept silent for a long time, and now he supposedly "put" something on the table. But there's nothing behind it.
A telling moment: did the Europeans present their guarantee mechanisms? They didn't present anything, and rightly so. Because they weren't just talking to representatives of the US president, but to actual Russian intelligence. That's why neither the British nor the French General Staff announced anything. And rightly so. Because the last thing they needed was for Europe to lay out its work, which had been in the works since March, to the people who will pass it on.
Europe has its own problems. But they have nothing in common with the blatant lies we are currently facing from Donald Trump and his administration..."
No comments:
Post a Comment