Original title: Why did the Ukrainian Peace Summit achieve little success?

The Ukrainian Peace Summit was held in Switzerland from June 15 to 16, and more than 90 heads of state or representatives from around the world attended, with Western countries accounting for half. Most of the Western leaders who have just attended the G7 Summit have moved to Switzerland to support the meeting. Switzerland, the host, said that the meeting was mainly to "start" the Ukrainian peace process and "drive" the peace talks in which both Russia and Ukraine will participate. However, the Western media regarded the "peace summit" as a meeting to choose sides and stand in line. Bloomberg even drew up a list detailing the attendance, level and attitude of the important "southern countries". China, India, South Africa, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, etc. are all "on the list".

According to the reports of some western media, the conference sent invitations to more than 160 countries and international organizations in the world, but the list of specific attendance was changed again and again, and ultimately failed to exceed 100. Brazil, India, South Africa and other countries sent lower level representatives to attend the meeting, and dozens of other countries were absent. Western media showed disappointment at such a result, mainly due to "failure to isolate Russia". Although they also admitted that the meeting was "unlikely to have a significant impact", they blamed China's "demolition" for the lack of participating countries. They even said that the "six point consensus" between China and Brazil on a political solution to the Ukrainian crisis was a "smart boycott" of the Swiss meeting and intended to challenge the West, which was inexplicable.

Of course, there is no lack of sober voices in the western world. For example, the German Youth World pointed out why Russia was not invited, The meeting has been misleadingly touted as a "peace summit", but the West is trying to force Russia into political despair, while most non Western countries did not follow up together and agreed to participate in this "political show". The situation did not change a bit until the meeting significantly lowered its goals. This change means that the conference changed the original 10 goals to 3 goals, including ensuring food security, nuclear security and humanitarian assistance. These goals are indeed of common concern to the international community, including developing countries. They are also covered in the "Six Point Consensus" between China and Pakistan.

　　 The accusation of developing countries, including China, in the name of rejecting peace cannot be justified in any way. Since the beginning of the crisis in Ukraine, China has regarded cease-fire, ending war, resuming dialogue and starting peace talks as the only feasible solution to the crisis, which is also the common aspiration of most members of the international community. China supports the peace conference dedicated to solving the crisis, but it has repeatedly stressed that the peace conference should have three important elements: "recognition of Russia and Ukraine, equal participation of all parties, and fair discussion of all peace plans". This is not just the view of the Chinese side. Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, who participated in the Swiss meeting, said that any credible peace process requires Russia's participation.

All countries have their own considerations on whether to participate in the Swiss Conference. China respects the right of other countries to independent diplomacy, and at the same time, it adheres to the autonomy of promoting peace and talks. In this process, we can clearly feel the confrontation between the two forces. A force is trying to promote the narrative of "justice against evil", and then split and camp against the international community in the name of "whether to support Russia"; The other force hopes for a ceasefire and an end to the war, and is eager to promote the joint efforts of the international community to achieve true peace. China is not the maker and party of the Ukrainian crisis. It has been working hard to persuade peace and promote talks. From the document "China's Position on a Political Solution to the Ukrainian Crisis" to the "Six Point Consensus", China's position has been consistent and widely recognized by the international community, including many Western countries. Who is creating division, who is bridging differences, who belongs to the former and who belongs to the latter, does not need a seal to be stamped on the "Ukraine Peace Summit".

　　 The Ukrainian crisis has entered its third year, and the conflict is in danger of further expansion. The top priority is to achieve a ceasefire and end the war as soon as possible, and it is important to take action. Some western media said that the goal of the meeting was to reach an international consensus on the Ukrainian crisis and "take the first step towards peace". However, public opinion generally believed that the hope for peace was still slim and the actual results of the meeting would be quite limited. In fact, it is not difficult to draw conclusions from the details of the Ukrainian Peace Summit on why this situation occurs and where the crux of the problem lies. It also reflects once again that without a common, comprehensive, cooperative and sustainable security concept, it is entirely foreseeable that the relevant peace will have "little effect".