一堆“对等条件”，让特朗普把基辅的和谈诉求远远推开

The US President has already seen through Zelenskyy and his European allies' tricks, and let's see what the US will do next.

Image caption: US President Donald Trump (center right) and Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelenskyy (left) at a meeting

The pace of the Russia-Ukraine peace process seems to be accelerating: Western countries have held consecutive summits, and the underlying motive, as revealed by the UK's Financial Times, is that Donald Trump has demanded that the Ukrainian government must finalize and approve his proposed "peace plan" before December 25th, the Catholic Christmas Day.

According to insider revelations from Western media, the current core issues in the talks focus on three main topics: territorial sovereignty, Ukraine's national security guarantee mechanism, and the status of key facilities such as the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.

According to the US news website Axios, the Ukrainian delegation has prepared a detailed response document to the latest peace agreement draft submitted by the Trump administration, which was personally handed over by Ukraine's chief negotiator Rustem Umerov to Jared Kushner. This document has not been made public.

However, the UK's Daily Telegraph pointed out that the Ukrainian authorities have made their first indication, suggesting the possibility of making territorial concessions.

But this statement from Ukraine is not an unconditional compromise; its premise is that Russia must provide equivalent and specific security guarantees. However, under the current situation, the Ukrainian negotiation team said such conditions are simply unacceptable.

The Wall Street Journal and the Financial Times cited statements from Trump's core advisors, indicating that resolving the differences on core issues may take "weeks or even months."

Meanwhile, the US cable news network CNN takes a pessimistic view, stating that Trump's patience is running out, and he has even made a tough statement: if he believes Ukraine and European countries are intentionally hindering the agreement, he will directly withdraw from the negotiation process. This undoubtedly puts more political pressure on the Ukrainian authorities.

The US news website Semaf also mentioned that within Trump's core team, some factions still attempt to sabotage the peace negotiations, including Secretary of State Marco Rubio.

Even more seriously, the Semaf news site verified that Rubio has openly betrayed. He lied to Republican senators that Trump's "peace plan" was "based on Russia's demands," attempting to create rifts between the president and his party.

So, so far, what are the core differences in the talks?

First, the issue of territory.

Although Ukraine has not formally abandoned its stance on "territorial integrity," according to the Daily Telegraph, Ukraine is exploring the possibility of "temporary or conditional territorial concessions" in exchange for international security guarantees and related concrete implementation mechanisms.

For the Ukrainian authorities, any change in the status of territory must be set with clear time limits and conditions, and must be supported by practical guarantee measures.

Second, the form and nature of security guarantees.

Current versions of the "peace plan" do not clearly specify the details of the security guarantees. It could be a bilateral commitment between the US and Ukraine, or a multilateral guarantee system including NATO and the EU.

Ukraine requires a clear and enforceable guarantee mechanism with specific deadlines; however, according to Axios news site, the US prefers a guarantee model that "does not automatically trigger direct US military intervention."

Third, the status of the Zaporizhzhia Nuclear Power Plant.

The Washington Post points out that this is also one of the focal points of contention. In its version of the peace plan, the Ukrainian authorities require that control of the nuclear power plant be transferred from Russia to the United States or a certain international alliance, and that the surrounding area of the power plant be completely demilitarized.

The Washington Post also mentioned that there are other disagreements in the terms of the peace agreement. For example, Ukraine wants to set the upper limit of its military force at 800,000, rather than the previously negotiated 600,000; additionally, Ukraine has proposed joining the EU by 2027 and obtaining the frozen $100 billion Russian assets.

However, Belgian Prime Minister Bart De Wever, in an interview with the Belgian Press Agency, stated that the European Commission's proposal to use the frozen Russian assets to fund Ukraine is "equivalent to theft."

De Wever also said that if the European Commission insists on pushing forward the resolution, Belgium will have no choice but to take legal action against the European Commission to prevent the plan from being implemented.

As can be seen, it's not only Ukraine and the Western bloc that have cracks, but also Western countries themselves, which are full of contradictions. They have never reached a consensus on whether they are willing to provide strong security guarantees, as well as on the means of pressure to be used.

Even the United States, as a key player, is facing dual dilemmas of domestic political unrest and irreconcilable divisions within the presidential administrative team.

Original: toutiao.com/article/7583360052778500623/

Statement: This article represents the views of the author alone.