Site Title

Hamid Zarei

2025-08-18

Diplomacy has always shown its value — before, during, and after wars. Today, the United States’ renewed effort to mediate peace in Ukraine is a reminder that power is not only military but also diplomatic, economic, and political.

The recent Alaska summit and Washington gathering, brought the U.S., European leaders, Ukraine, and even Russia into the same framework of dialogue. While no ceasefire has yet been declared — and Kyiv faces growing pressure to accept tough conditions — the very fact that negotiations have started is a breakthrough.

Two issues dominate the talks:

Security guarantees for Ukraine

and Territorial concessions.

At its core, the debate resembles a trade-off: land in exchange for security. Moscow, however, rejects the presence of NATO peacekeepers, complicating the search for a sustainable deal.

Geopolitically, Russia negotiates from a position of strength, using its territorial control as leverage. At the same time, the Kremlin maintains close contact with allies — particularly China — to avoid isolation. Yet, China’s formal absence from the peace process is striking, given its status as a permanent UN Security Council member. While Beijing once engaged in shuttle diplomacy and even proposed a peace plan in 2023, it was largely sidelined. Today, China is occasionally mentioned as a potential security guarantor, though still informally.

What This Means for Global Actors

The U.S. is testing its global leadership, showing that it can manage crises not only through force but also through diplomacy. This could become a benchmark for how Washington handles conflicts in an increasingly multipolar world. Europe views peace as essential to its own security and energy diversification. However, divisions remain between Eastern European hardliners and Western pragmatists, complicating a unified stance. China is deliberately silent. By staying in the background, it preserves flexibility — keeping ties with Moscow while leaving the door open to return later, especially in reconstruction and investment. Russia seeks to lock in gains. By refusing NATO’s role as guarantor, it reinforces its red lines while leaning on support from China and parts of the Global South to balance Western pressure.

Looking Ahead

Short-term: No durable ceasefire, but provisional steps such as humanitarian corridors and limited security assurances.

Medium-term: A “frozen conflict” with de facto territorial concessions, echoing past precedents in Georgia (2008) or Crimea (2014).

Long-term: Either a comprehensive land-for-security deal or the emergence of a new European security architecture,

Final Thought

A lasting peace in Ukraine may still be distant. But what matters is that the process has begun. These negotiations will not only shape Ukraine’s future but could also redefine the balance of power in international security.

——————————-