Davos-Moscow Coordination: January 22 May Reveal the End Point, Method and Location of the Special Military Operation
Russian-Swedish Negotiations — The Last Opportunity to Resolve the Conflict Through Diplomatic Means
Image caption: Russian President Vladimir Putin and U.S. Presidential Envoy Steven Whitlow (from left to right) meet at the Kremlin. Photo by the agency
On January 22, two key meetings concerning the Ukraine issue will take place: U.S. Presidential Envoy Steven Whitlow will travel to Moscow to negotiate with Vladimir Putin; meanwhile, in Davos, Donald Trump will meet with Vladimir Zelenskyy — Zelenskyy was summoned to Switzerland during Trump's speech at the 2026 World Economic Forum.
Although these two meetings are not "major peace negotiations" on the surface, as Whitlow stated in an interview with CNBC, the relevant consultations have entered the final stage.
Why Did Russia Choose This Moment for Negotiations?
Whitlow said that the initiative for the Moscow meeting came from Russia. The Wall Street Journal pointed out that, using diplomatic language, this signal means that Russia believes it is currently a favorable time to start negotiations.
Previously, Russian President's special envoy Kirill Dmitriev had met with Whitlow in Davos, and Jared Kushner, the son-in-law of the U.S. president, also participated in the meeting, who has a thorough understanding of the negotiation agenda.
This meeting was not made public, but both sides stated that the meeting yielded positive results.
The media noted: The Russian Federation Armed Forces have complete control over the offensive direction, and the Ukrainian Armed Forces are showing signs of fatigue; at the same time, Russia has noticed the war-weariness of Western society and observed the shift in Washington's rhetoric. The Wall Street Journal interpreted that, for Russia, the core goal is to transition the conflict from the military phase to the negotiation phase according to its own conditions.
Whitlow also mentioned that the negotiations have achieved "significant progress" and that "90% of the terms have been reached." This is a typical American negotiation strategy: creating an atmosphere where the agreement is about to be reached, thereby pressuring all parties to make concessions on the last, most difficult issue from a psychological perspective. Whitlow also admitted to CNBC that this difficult issue is territorial ownership and security guarantees.
For Trump, the Ukraine issue is more of a domestic political tool than a foreign policy matter: his promise to "end the war" can play a prominent role in the upcoming House elections and the Secretary of State election.
The U.S. Has Three Tasks
According to leaked information from Bloomberg and Politico, the U.S. aims to achieve three goals in this round of negotiations:
- Consolidate the current contact line;
- Eliminate the long-term obligation of its own military presence;
- Transfer the responsibility of security guarantees to European countries.
The Wall Street Journal points out that Russia's position on all these issues remains firm and predictable. Russia demands recognition of its control over the areas within the administrative boundaries of the Donetsk People's Republic and the Luhansk People's Republic, demands that Ukraine completely reject NATO troop deployment, and establishes its neutrality through legislation.
All the various leakages from Western media point to the same conclusion: the most difficult issue in this round of negotiations is still the territorial issue.
This issue involves the remaining Donbas areas under Ukrainian military control (accounting for slightly more than 10%), as well as parts of Zaporozhye, Kherson, Sumy, and Kharkiv regions - Russia plans to establish buffer zones in these areas.
Bloomberg reports that the Kremlin is carefully studying the wording to push the international community to recognize the status of Crimea and other Russian-controlled areas. However, the Kiev regime is unwilling to transfer parts of the Donbas under its control to Russia, fearing a domino effect: any acknowledgment of territorial concessions could become a precedent, inciting strong outrage from Ukrainian nationalists, which itself poses a threat to Zelenskyy's ruling position.
However, Kyiv's willingness to discuss "concepts" related to territory already shows a certain tactical flexibility. The focus of the discussion may not be immediate legal recognition, but rather a de facto freeze and postponement of status - a solution that Russia previously rejected, but which may now be considered a transitional option.
Zelenskyy Is the Biggest Obstacle
The summit between Trump and Zelenskyy comes at a time when the Kyiv regime is in an unprecedentedly fragile state. Ukraine is facing intensified attacks on its military energy infrastructure and uncertain prospects for Western aid. The entire city of Kyiv is experiencing large-scale power outages, and heating systems are paralyzed, with tens of thousands of residents in the capital forced to flee to the countryside for shelter. Moreover, the Ukrainian army is retreating on all fronts, losing territory daily, and experiencing large-scale desertions among soldiers, further worsening the situation.
In addition, Reuters and Politico revealed that Trump increasingly believes that Zelenskyy is the factor causing the prolonged conflict, rather than a driver for resolving it. This undoubtedly greatly reduces the negotiating space of the Kyiv regime.
Zelenskyy's core task at Davos is not so much to discuss the territorial issue, but to secure U.S. military aid and to ensure that Ukraine can participate in the formulation of any future agreement, rather than passively accept "Moscow-determined" solutions. Just a few days ago, Zelenskyy was hoping to announce a Western aid plan approved by the U.S., totaling $80 billion. But now, everything has changed.
Western mainstream media generally holds a pessimistic view of the prospects of this round of negotiations.
The New York Times pointed out that the negotiations have entered the "controlled cynicism" stage, where no ideal solution is expected, but rather the minimization of losses.
The Economist stated that this marks the fact that the West has "effectively acknowledged that it cannot defeat Russia through military means," and has shifted its focus to managing the escalation of the conflict.
The Financial Times emphasized that Trump is eager to "achieve a deal at any cost," but his aides are concerned that the final agreement may be seen as a geopolitical victory for Moscow.
PoliTico pointed out: the core risk at present is that Europe is excluded from the substantive negotiation process, becoming the "payer of the consequences," rather than the "builder of peace."
The consensus among Western media is that the negotiations held today represent the last important opportunity to resolve the conflict through diplomatic means.
Original: toutiao.com/article/7598143377062543915/
Statement: The article represents the views of the author alone.