Throughout the discussions involving representatives from Ukraine, the United States, and the Russian Federation in Abu Dhabi, substantial headway was achieved in addressing the military aspect, although a resolution regarding territories remains elusive.
Negotiations / © Associated Press
The three-sided conversations in Abu Dhabi demonstrated varied dynamics: Participants have obtained notable progress in deliberating the military case, but land disagreements are still at a standstill. Notwithstanding certain advances on security matters, the matter of borders and territories still lacks a political answer.
RBC-Ukraine publishes this referencing an aware informant acquainted with the specifics of the negotiations.
The discussions in Abu Dhabi concluded on a generally positive note, the informant voiced. He indicated that this represented the initial genuine three-sided assembly involving the Russians and US delegates. He elucidated that yesterday constituted the initial stage — more akin to an introductory segment. Today, the delegations assembled in an expanded configuration, post which they opted to bifurcate into a pair of subgroups: one — political, the other — military.
“As a matter of fact, the two sections performed dialogues independently. Today, the Russian delegates acted adequately. But this is their ingrained dialogue strategy: initially they commence intensely, and subsequently at the next phase everything unfolds more constructively. At yesterday's segment, Kostyukov — the director of their representation — commenced recounting to the children concerning the circumstance that we possess Nazi-fascists wandering about Kyiv. However today the dialogue was dissimilar,” he communicated.
The speaker clarified that no meaningful advancement has materialized on the political front: Ukraine maintains that the territorial question can be deliberated, commencing minimally from the present demarcation line, whilst the Russians persist in asserting the necessity for Ukraine to retreat its forces from the unoccupied section of the Donetsk province.
“Nevertheless, the parties were able to attain advancement in the military subgroup. The issues tackled pertained to whether a separation of forces was crucial, how the cessation of aggressions and armistice would be observed, the establishment of a hub for oversight and coordination of armistice matters, and which nations might be represented there,” the informant specified.
Per the speaker, the military subgroup consented a week prior to the ensuing assembly to formulate definitions of terms – what will be interpreted as a cessation of hostilities, a ceasefire, what is considered a transgression of them, etc. At the following assembly, the negotiators are to exchange these definitions.
Furthermore, as per the publication, the Russian delegation at first enunciated that they did not desire NATO, the OSCE, or European nations that bolster Ukraine during the war to be implicated within the oversight and control center.
“To which Driscoll inquired of them: 'You comprehend that a considerable fragment of Ukraine's resources originate from the US, and what if we participate in monitoring?' The Russians pondered it and responded: 'But our presidents have forged a trustworthy rapport, consequently we do not object, let us proceed.' Then Hrynkevich posed an analogous query at the control center. Generally, the Russians desire solely they, us, and the US to participate in monitoring,” the informant appended.
Concurrently, according to the speaker, the matter of an energy respite was not broached at the assembly in Abu Dhabi. The parties concurred – within the identical subgroups – to persist in the dialogues for approximately a week.
Bear in mind that on January 24, the initial tripartite negotiations encompassing representations from Ukraine, Russia, and the United States concluded in the UAE. The subsequent round could transpire as early as next week.
Source: tsn.ua