Separate statements in Riyadh reflect deep divide between Russia, Ukraine: Experts

Three days of technical-level negotiations on the details of a potential ceasefire in Ukraine concluded in Riyadh on Tuesday without an official joint statement. Experts say this indicates that there is still a long way to go for a real Russia-Ukraine ceasefire as the three parties – U.S., Russia and Ukraine – have different demands and needs.

"U.S. President Donald Trump wants to end this matter that happened during the former President Joe Biden's term as soon as possible to reduce the U.S. investment in this matter and the burden on Americans. Meanwhile, Russia's demands are certainly not a simple ceasefire. Russia not only wants to end the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, but also to solve the problems of NATO's eastward expansion and the post-war order in Europe," said Wang Yiwei, a professor at the School of International Studies at Renmin University of China.

Cui Hongjian, a professor at the Academy of Regional and Global Governance, Beijing Foreign Studies University, believes that the separate statements suggested that Russia and Ukraine remain deeply divided over a ceasefire. 

Ukraine, he noted, fears that a U.S.-Russia compromise could come at its expense, which is reflected in its statements, emphasizing the potential negative consequences of a Black Sea ceasefire. Meanwhile, Russia sees the Black Sea ceasefire as a means to achieve broader goals, including pushing the West to further ease or lift sanctions, which only deepens Ukraine's concerns, said Cui.

He noted that the ongoing intense fighting between Russia and Ukraine indicates that neither side has shown enough willingness to agree to a temporary ceasefire. "A temporary ceasefire is not just a technical arrangement; it must serve as a foundation for a broader or long-term peace. Otherwise, its impact on resolving the overall Russia-Ukraine conflict will be minimal," Cui added.

The intense parallel interactions between the U.S. and delegations from Ukraine and Russia, including a 12-hour one between the U.S. and Russia on Monday, and two shorter rounds between the U.S. and Ukraine on Sunday and Tuesday, came amid intense fighting on the battlefield.

Although Washington signaled on Tuesday its willingness to continue facilitating negotiations between the warring parties, analysts remain skeptical about the prospects of such a diplomatic push, citing deep-seated distrust, conflicting demands among stakeholders and the inherent complexities of the process.

Conflicting assessments

"The fundamental cause of the current deadlock lies in America's biased approach to mediation – one that failed to address the concerns of both Russia and Ukraine, ignored the stakes of other affected parties, and underestimated the historical intricacies and complexity of the Ukraine crisis," Kang Jie, an associate research fellow at the China Institute of International Studies, told CGTN.

The U.S. mistakenly believed it could hastily broker a ceasefire through a great-power deal that treated smaller nations' interests as bargaining chips, epitomizing the adage: "Haste breeds failure," Kang said.

The ceasefire in the Ukraine crisis marks merely the "beginning of the end," while substantive negotiations for a lasting agreement remain nowhere in sight, Kang said, adding that only when all direct parties and stakeholders are integrated into the negotiation process can there be progress toward a durable agreement that balances competing interests.

On Tuesday, hours after the U.S. and Ukrainian delegations concluded their second round of talks, the White House issued separate statements elaborating on its understanding of the parallel meetings.

It stated that the U.S. had agreed separately with Russia and Ukraine to "ensure safe navigation, eliminate the use of force, and prevent the use of commercial vessels for military purposes in the Black Sea," and to develop measures for implementing the presidents' agreement to "ban strikes against energy facilities of Russia and Ukraine."

The U.S., with Russia and Ukraine respectively, also "welcomes the good offices of third countries with a view toward supporting the implementation of the energy and maritime agreements" and "will continue working toward achieving a durable and lasting peace," the statement added.

Among the outcomes of the U.S.-Russia talks, the U.S. pledged to help restore Russia's access to the global market for agricultural and fertilizer exports, reduce maritime insurance costs, and improve access to ports and payment systems for such transactions.

In the U.S.-Ukraine talks, both sides reaffirmed the United States' commitment to facilitating the exchange of prisoners of war, securing the release of civilian detainees, and ensuring the return of forcibly transferred Ukrainian children.

Meanwhile, the Kremlin stated on Tuesday that Russia and the U.S. had agreed to ensure the implementation of the Black Sea Initiative, contingent on the easing of sanctions on Russia's agricultural and food trade.

Russia also stipulated the removal of restrictions on its food and fertilizer producers and exporters, the servicing of related Russian-flagged vessels in ports and the supply of agricultural machinery to Russia, according to the Kremlin.

A long road to a real ceasefire

"The U.S. issued a statement immediately showing that it is very eager to show its mediation achievements. The Russian side did not issue a statement at the first time, which indicates that the two sides have not yet reached a complete agreement on the specific method of partially lifting sanctions. Russia hopes to continue to put pressure on the U.S. in this way," Kang said.

The Black Sea is no longer a major strategic direction for both Russia and Ukraine, so there is a common interest in reaching a compromise, Kang said, adding that however, this compromise is also fragile at present. 

"For example, there may be differences in the definition of military operations in the Black Sea region between the two sides, how to ensure a ceasefire, and how to define the responsibility for breaking the ceasefire," Kang noted.

"In fact, there are still many specific issues. Now Russia and Ukraine cannot negotiate directly. I think it is difficult to achieve a real ceasefire by relying on the United States to pass messages in the middle," said Cui. 

He suggested that the U.S. should try its best to promote Russia-Ukraine face-to-face negotiation, adding that to some extent, Russia and Ukraine currently are just acting for the U.S. due to its pressure, but they don't really want to put it into practice.

"If they really want to reach a consensus as soon as possible, the first thing is to take the initiative to reduce military confrontation. That is, both sides should have a common will, just like what the United States said to really began to turn to a peaceful solution," Cui said. He added that the two sides should also take some other measures rather than relying upon the U.S. to lead the negotiations.

Cui suggested that the Europe should play a more positive role in the process, instead of passively standing on the side of Ukraine like it is now, continuing to support the conflict and so on. "Russia and Ukraine are still very far away from a true ceasefire," said Cui.