On June 16 local time, the first "Peace Summit" on Ukraine ended in Switzerland. The pictures of this article are from visual China
On June 16 local time, the first "Peace Summit" on Ukraine ended in Switzerland. Previously, about 160 countries and international organizations were invited to attend the conference. The list of participants finally released by Switzerland includes representatives of 92 countries and regions and 8 international organizations, including 57 heads of state.
Zelensky made a speech at the meeting
The discussion at the summit focused on three points of the ten point "peace plan" for Ukraine proposed by Ukrainian President Zelensky, namely, "nuclear security, food security, prisoner exchange and returning Ukrainian children expelled". The joint statement issued after the meeting said that the participating countries reached agreement on the three points raised by Uzbekistan. At the end of the statement, it also stressed that achieving peace "requires the participation and dialogue of all parties".
The statement reaffirmed the Charter of the United Nations and said that the "peace plan" proposed by Uzbekistan and other "peace plans in line with international law" previously proposed by Uzbekistan are the basis for the Swiss Summit.
Finally, among the participants, 78 countries and regions signed the joint statement, while India, South Africa, Brazil, Thailand, Indonesia, Armenia, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Jordan and other countries did not. Among international organizations, the OSCE, the United Nations and the Organization of American States did not sign the declaration, and only four European organizations that excluded Russia signed the declaration.
Russia was not invited to attend the Swiss Peace Summit. Switzerland said that it had repeatedly expressed its openness to inviting Russia to the summit, but the Russian side "repeatedly hinted that it was not interested in participating [3]", so Switzerland did not send an official invitation to Russia.
During the summit, many representatives mentioned that Russia's absence prevented the summit from achieving substantive results. The Russian side has said many times before that it would be meaningless to start the peace process in Ukraine without Russia's participation, and accused the West of putting forward a peace initiative while supplying weapons to Ukraine as a "hoax". Russian President's press secretary Peskov commented on the 14th that "there (Switzerland) will not seek a peaceful solution and will not consider the interests of all parties."
Just the day before the summit, Russian President Putin proposed the latest ceasefire and negotiation conditions, including Ukraine's full withdrawal from Donetsk, Lugansk, Kherson and Zaporoge, and the lifting of all Western sanctions against Russia. However, at the summit, this proposal was rejected by Ukraine and western countries.
On the 17th, Globegroup combined the reports of Ukrainian "RBC. UA" news network, Kiev Post and other media. On the 16th, at the press conference held after the meeting, Zerensky accused the Russian side of "not ready" to discuss a just peace, and proposed the conditions for Ukrainian negotiations: if Russian troops withdraw from Ukraine, he is willing to negotiate with the Russian side immediately.
On the 16th, at a press conference held after the meeting, Zelensky (China) accused the Russian side of being "not ready" to discuss a just peace, and proposed the conditions for the Ukrainian negotiation
List of "real-time changes"
Since Switzerland announced to host the Ukraine Peace Summit, the list of participants has become the focus of attention. At the beginning of May, Switzerland sent out about 160 letters of invitation to not only countries, but also international organizations such as the United Nations, the OSCE, the Council of Europe and representatives of some religious institutions.
But until the day before the summit, the final list of participants was always full of "variables".
At the beginning of June, Nikiforov, the press secretary of the President of Ukraine, said that 107 countries and international organizations had agreed to attend the meeting. Subsequently, the President of the Swiss Confederation Amherd said on June 10 that about 90 countries and organizations had responded positively to the invitation, half of which came from Europe. On the 12th, Radio Free Europe quoted unnamed EU diplomats as saying that the number of participating countries dropped from 93 to 78, but a Ukrainian source who participated in organizing the summit denied this news.
According to the list released by Switzerland on the evening of the 14th, a total of 57 heads of state and 29 ministerial level representatives from 92 countries and 8 international organizations decided to attend the meeting, including heads of state from the United States and Europe, as well as representatives from some countries in South America, Africa, Asia and the Middle East. Some analysts pointed out that this figure shows that many countries are still "waiting and watching".
On the 15th, US Vice President Harris took the place of President Biden, who was absent due to campaign fundraising, and announced a US $1.5 billion aid to Ukraine for energy infrastructure and civil security projects. However, the New York Post said that Harris flew back to Washington before the main agenda of the summit began after meeting with world leaders for just a few hours. According to Reuters, the National Security Affairs Assistant to the President of the United States Sullivan attended the summit on the 16th.
Except for Western countries, Saudi Arabia, which was said not to plan to attend the meeting before, finally sent its Foreign Minister to attend the meeting. Politico.eu, the European version of the US political news network, reported that this was related to Zelensky's unannounced visit to Saudi Arabia on June 12. In addition, Ukraine hopes that Saudi Arabia can host the next peace summit, because Saudi Arabia maintains good relations with China and Russia at the same time. Saudi Arabia has not commented on this "invitation" for the time being.
Western media pay close attention to whether Brazil, India and South Africa among the BRICS countries will attend the conference. According to the final list of participants, Brazil, together with the United Nations, the Vatican Vatican and the Catholic Patriarch of Constantinople, attended the meeting as observers. South Africa sent a lower level delegation, while India's delegation was led by its ambassador to Russia.
During the summit, Russia's absence was mentioned many times.
Saudi Foreign Minister Faisal bin Farhan Al Saud, who attended the meeting, said that negotiations need to make "difficult compromises" within the framework of the peace road map, and any credible peace process needs Russia's participation. Turkish Foreign Minister Ferdan also mentioned that Russia's absence has hindered the achievement of the summit, and pointed out the lack of trust between Russia and Ukraine. "Each side views the actions of the other side (making suggestions) as an extension of broader war efforts".
Celso Amorim, the foreign policy adviser of the Brazilian President who was attending the United Nations Trade Conference near Geneva during the summit, also said that "you will not negotiate with your friends", but "you will negotiate with your opponents". "I am not defending one side or the other, but I am very clear that the meeting held in Switzerland will not have any results."
More than a month before the summit, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said in an interview on May 5 that Russia would not participate in activities to publicize Zerensky's "peace plan", and that there was no object that could be negotiated at present.
In his opening speech, Kenyan President Ruto denounced the recent decision of the Group of Seven to use Russian frozen assets as collateral to provide Ukraine with a loan of about 50 billion dollars after condemning Russia's military action against Ukraine. He said that "unilateral occupation of Russian assets is also illegal".
Austrian Prime Minister Carl Nehamer described the summit as a "Western echo chamber" and believed that without the participation of Asia, Africa and South America, the West would not be able to influence Russia in this peace summit and change Russia's view of the Russian Ukrainian conflict.
In addition to the representatives of the participating countries, the Swiss right-wing party, the Swiss People's Party (SVP), also condemned the government for not being invited to attend the meeting, saying that this would damage Switzerland's "traditional neutrality". Previously, the party supported the petition for a referendum on Switzerland's neutrality.
Outside Russia, China's absence has also aroused widespread concern. On May 31, when chairing a regular press conference, Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Mao Ning said that China attaches importance to Switzerland's hosting of the first Ukraine Peace Summit, and has maintained close communication with Switzerland and relevant parties since the beginning of this year.
Maoning said that China has always insisted that the international peace conference should have three important elements: recognition of Russia and Ukraine, equal participation of all parties, and fair discussion of all peace plans. Otherwise, it would be difficult to play a substantive role in restoring peace. These requirements of China for the peace conference are fair and impartial and not directed at any party. They are reflected in the consensus on a political solution to the crisis in Ukraine jointly issued with Brazil recently, and reflect the general concern of the international community, especially the developing countries. According to the feedback from all parties and the announced meeting schedule, the three elements proposed by China seem to be difficult to achieve. There is still a clear gap between the meeting arrangements and China's requirements and the general expectations of the international community. China is difficult to attend the meeting, and has informed the parties concerned of China's considerations and concerns.
Maoning said that we will continue to promote peace talks in our own way, maintain communication with all parties, and jointly accumulate conditions for a political solution to the Ukrainian crisis.
The "shrinking" agenda and the "not discussed" Russian version
Despite the low expectations of the summit outcome, Keith Krause, a professor at the Institute of International Relations and Development in Geneva, said that Ukraine needs to gain momentum at this meeting and obtain new commitments from allies on issues such as territorial integrity and future relations, even though its accession to NATO and the EU may be far away.
"I don't think anyone will dream of working out a new peace plan through this meeting, or even reaching some agreement to stop the hostilities on the battlefield. But as past wars have shown, including the Second World War, the discussion on the peace contour began long before the fighting on the battlefield stopped," said Klaus.
After the summit ended on June 16, the participants issued a joint statement saying that they reached agreement on the three points put forward by Uzbekistan, including agreeing that the Zaborore nuclear power plant should operate under the control of Uzbekistan and the supervision of the International Atomic Energy Agency, and would not accept any threat or use of nuclear weapons; The safe transit of commercial shipping in the Black Sea and the Asian Sea is crucial to global food security, and Urumqi's agricultural products should be safely and freely provided to third countries; All prisoners of war must be released through "complete exchange". At the end of the statement, it stressed that achieving peace "requires the participation and dialogue of all parties".
Reuters said that the statement ignored more difficult issues, such as Ukraine's possible post-war solution, whether Ukraine can join NATO or how to manage the withdrawal of Russian and Ukrainian troops. In addition, the joint statement did not choose to call the current Russian military action "aggression", but "war".
On the 13th, the BBC quoted a source as saying that the wording of the joint statement of the Summit was still under discussion until that day, and some of the wording in the document was "vague" to allow as many signatories as possible, mainly the countries of the global South to participate in support. Bloomberg and Reuters also pointed out that it is Ukraine's goal for this meeting to persuade major "global southern" countries to join the ranks of isolating Russia.
The source also revealed to the BBC that the summit organizers were faced with a dilemma: whether to discuss more points of the "Ukraine Peace Plan", sacrifice the number of countries that signed the statement, or discuss fewer points, but collect the signatures of the most countries. The source said that Kiev eventually preferred the second scheme and started work at the end of March this year, in which Switzerland also "played a role". At the same time, the opinions finally reached by the participants will be conveyed to Russia by the "intermediate countries".
However, in the end, the western powers and their allies did not persuade some major "non aligned countries" to sign the post conference joint statement together, including the 14 participating BRICS countries.
Earlier, Swiss Foreign Minister Francis Cassis said in an interview on June 10 that Switzerland had repeatedly said that there could be no peace process without Russia. "The question is not whether Russia will participate in the peace process, but when it will participate in the peace process." Switzerland is focusing on finding problems that recur in almost all existing peace plans, and taking them to the first summit to establish "trust among stakeholders", so as to enter the "second step".
Yermak, director of the office of the President of Uzbekistan, said during the summit that world leaders would discuss the new "Joint Peace Plan", which Uzbekistan hopes will be based on the ten point peace plan of Uzbekistan. He added that Ukraine "is open to all opinions of all countries that respect international law" and is considering the possibility of submitting the "Joint Peace Plan" to Russia, which "may be carried out during the second summit". When evaluating the summit, Yermark said, "We think it has been successful, because there are many countries (participating in)".
Several participating countries mentioned that Russia should be invited to the second peace summit after that.
Just one day before the opening of the Swiss Summit, Putin issued the latest statement on the conditions for the ceasefire and peace talks between Russia and Ukraine on the 14th.
Putin said that Ukraine should promise not to join NATO and maintain its neutral, non aligned and nuclear free status. The Ukrainian army should completely withdraw from Lugansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporoge regions. The status of the above four regions as well as Crimea and Sevastopol as Russian Federation regions should be determined in international treaties. In addition, the West should lift all sanctions against Russia. Putin also said that these conditions are based on ending the conflict rather than freezing it. If Ukraine and the West reject the new peace proposal, the further conditions will be different.
The picture shows Russian President Putin, who issued the latest statement on the conditions for the ceasefire and peace talks between Russia and Ukraine on the 14th
In response, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Ukraine issued a statement saying that Putin's purpose of sending a signal at this time was to "mislead the international community and undermine diplomatic efforts". In an interview with reporters during the summit on the 15th, Yermak said that Ukraine "will not compromise on the issue of independence or territorial integrity".
During the Swiss Summit, the latest conditions of Russia were attacked by leaders of western countries. German Prime Minister Schultz said that the leaders of the Group of Seven "did not discuss the Russian proposal" because the proposal was generally considered "not serious" and intended to distract attention from the summit. British Prime Minister Sunak said that Putin "fabricated false statements about his willingness to negotiate". Harris said that Putin was not calling for negotiations, but "calling for surrender".
However, the press secretary of the Russian President Peskov said that Putin's proposal "will be considered very seriously". The Kiev regime "will also have some clearer heads" to consider whether it is worth waiting for the situation to further deteriorate. He also mentioned that Putin's proposal is "indefinite", but the front-line situation is "dynamic". The West has many responses to Putin's proposal, but "lacks constructiveness".
The President of the State Duma of the Russian Federation, Vladimir Vorokin, said that after the expiration of Zerensky's term of office on May 20 this year, the Verkhovna Rada of Ukraine was the only "legal entity" in the country. According to the information held by the Russian side, some Ukrainian lawmakers "have begun to discuss" Putin's proposal.
Was "very close" to peace
At the same time of the Swiss Summit, the parties disclosed more details about the Russia Ukraine peace talks in 2022. Since May 2022, the peace talks between Russia and Ukraine have been suspended.
In his speech on June 14, Putin said that on March 5, 2022, a "high-level mediator" who promised to reach an agreement with western leaders would negotiate with Russia. Putin said at the time that Russia did not rule out Ukraine's sovereignty over Kherson and Zaporoge, but only if Russia's right to land routes to Crimea must be guaranteed. The mediator was subsequently rejected in Kiev and accused of taking a pro Russian position. Putin said that the Ukrainian action was "inspired by the western behind the scenes manipulator".
Putin did not specify the identity of the "mediator". The Russian Businessman quoted the official website of Kegong as saying that former Israeli Prime Minister Bennett had visited Moscow on March 5, 2022.
According to a large number of documents disclosed by the New York Times on June 15, at the beginning of the negotiations from February to April 2022, Uzbekistan had promised to become a "permanent neutral country", never join NATO, and not allow foreign troops to be stationed in its territory. However, it requested the "guarantor country" that signed the peace agreement with Uzbekistan to ensure its security by establishing a no fly zone, providing weapons and using force when Uzbekistan was attacked.
The Russian side demanded that Ukraine recognize the independence of the "Donetsk People's Republic" and the "Lugansk People's Republic" and Russia's sovereignty over Crimea, prohibit any form of "beautification and propaganda of Nazism and neo Nazism, the Nazi movement and related organizations", and demanded that Ukraine and other relevant parties lift all sanctions and restrictions on Russia. In addition, according to the document disclosed by the Wall Street Times in March this year, the Russian side also demanded that Russian be used equally with Ukrainian in the Ukrainian government and courts, but Kiev did not sign this clause.
In addition, Russia demands to limit the size of Ukrainian troops, the number of weapons and the range of fire, while Ukraine seeks a higher upper limit. Among them, Russia hopes that the range of Ukrainian missiles will be limited to 25 miles, while Ukraine hopes that the range will be limited to 174 miles, which is enough to hit Crimea targets.
According to the report, a European diplomat revealed that Poland feared that Germany or France might try to persuade Ukraine to accept the Russian conditions and hoped to prevent this from happening. For this reason, when Polish President Duda met with NATO leaders in Brussels on March 24, 2022, he held up the text of the agreement between Russia and Ukraine on March 17 and asked "who will sign it", but NATO leaders did not speak.
At the subsequent meeting in Istanbul on March 29, Uzbekistan proposed that the two countries should "solve problems related to Crimea" through 10 or 15 years of diplomatic efforts. Russia seems to have recognized Ukraine's neutrality and security guarantee model, and no longer emphasizes Russia's territorial requirements. The negotiators also agreed that the leaders of the two countries would meet to eliminate the final differences.
When the time comes to April 2022, the negotiations will continue despite the "Bucha Incident". In the document of April 15, the two sides agreed that Ukraine would be permanently neutral and could join the European Union. The two sides also agreed to exclude Crimea from the treaty and place it under Russian control, but Ukraine did not recognize this. However, Russia requires that once Ukraine is attacked, all guarantor countries can provide assistance to Ukraine only after being approved by all guarantor countries, including Russia. Urumqi negotiators said that this made Ukraine lose interest in continuing negotiations.
At a meeting in Geneva in December 2023, Oleksandr Chalyi, a member of the Ukrainian negotiating group, said: "We managed to find a very real compromise solution. We were very close to ending the war in a peaceful way in the middle and end of April (2022)."
Now, the possibility of the parties involved in the Russian Ukrainian conflict returning to the 2022 version of the agreement seems to be very slim. In a research report in February this year, the Quincy Institute, an American think tank, said that Ukraine's greatest hope is to reach a solution through negotiations, protect its own security, reduce the risk of another attack or escalation of the situation, and promote stability in Europe and the wider world. However, unless both Russia and Ukraine and the West believe that a solution can fully meet their respective interests and is more desirable than continuing the war, no solution will last.
The Businessman commented after the Swiss Peace Summit that Ukraine's position in the joint statement was in "positive conflict" with the latest conditions proposed by Russia. Neither Kiev nor its allies nor Moscow intend to narrow their positions, which means that all parties will continue to convince each other of their own correctness on the battlefield.
The New York Times said that the war was more likely to end in a disturbing truce. Marc Weller, a professor of international law at Cambridge University who specializes in peace negotiations, analyzed that major western countries are expected to focus on defending Ukraine's future front with Russia, "rather than seeking reconciliation across the front".
