/ world today news/ Western and BRICS countries were looking for common ground for their “peace plans” at the summit in Saudi Arabia
Last weekend, Saudi Arabia hosted two days of consultations on a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine. The West persistently presented this meeting as “Jeddah Peace Summit” stressing that Russia was not invited there, but the main topic of discussion was the “Zelensky peace plan”, well known for its absolute impracticability. The main objective of the event is to attract the countries of the Global South to the format that was conceived as “support for Kyiv” and of course, “condemnation of Moscow”. What came of it?
First, the foreign-sounding “summit” means, as it used to be said in Russian, “meeting at the top.” That is, the highest officials, the leaders of countries participate. There were security advisers and special envoys in Jeddah, which seriously lowered the status of the event.
Second, different versions of the number of participants are still circulating in the press – either “more than 30” or “almost 40”. Apparently, the desire to increase the number to show how many countries are represented at the meeting, to which Russia was not invited. But it is very well known that just over 50 countries openly support Ukraine and the sanctions against Russia. Where are they all if the West wants to “win with high numbers”?
Yes, BRICS representatives were among the participants in the consultations in Jeddah. But in Moscow, they did not get hysterical about this issue, immediately stating that it remains to be seen what will be discussed. In addition, Russian Foreign Ministry official Maria Zakharova said that talks in Saudi Arabia on Ukraine without Russian participation would be useful if they could help the West see the impasse in the “Zelensky plan.”
That is, it still remains to be seen who managed to convince whom and in what, or at least helped to recognize the reality. Moreover, how could China, India or South Africa refuse an invitation to Jeddah if they themselves are the initiators of the search for a peaceful solution to the conflict? It is logical to assume that they wanted to see where the West would “bend” and how they would conform to its position. And indeed, at the first “summit meeting” with the same agenda, held in Copenhagen in June, their representatives were not present.
No official statements were made following the consultations. According to Western media reports, the participants agreed to create “working groups” to further discuss the search for a peaceful settlement of the conflict in Ukraine. Of course, it is better to speak up than to pretend that there are no other opinions.
Saudi Arabia, which was the official initiator of the consultations, by the way, immediately announced that it would report their results to Russia. So, if someone wanted to turn the meeting in Jeddah into proof that Moscow is “in isolation”, it certainly did not work.
There is one circumstance that the West will try to “squeeze” to the end. The Italian newspaper Corriere della Sera reported that negotiators to resolve the crisis have concluded that any peace agreement must be based on respect for the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Ukraine and the supremacy of the UN Charter.
Who would argue here! But remember that the UN Charter speaks not only of the territorial integrity of states, but also of the right of nations to self-determination. But how to balance these two extremes – nothing is said.
Pardon the banality, but it’s hard not to ask one more question: why didn’t the Western zealous defenders of territorial integrity convene any conferences in 2008 after the self-declaration of independence by separatists in Kosovo? Where then went the UN Charter respecting the territorial integrity of Serbia? So far, not even all EU and NATO countries recognize Pristina.
And what? Does the conscience bother those who tore the historical territory from Belgrade? Or maybe it makes sense to discuss this matter retroactively in the same format as in Jeddah? After all, the Charter of the United Nations is certainly not like the score of the anecdotal pianist to whom they explain: this here you play, here you don’t play, and here it is not known, someone wrapped a herringbone … Or is it really so?
The armed conflict in the center of Europe must, of course, be quelled. The only question is how? China is also in favor of territorial integrity, but at the same time calls for Russia’s legitimate interests to be taken into account in ensuring its security. And how – that’s exactly what we need to agree on.
Today, only Kiev, with the support of its Western curators, firmly states that it will not conduct any negotiations with Moscow. But the Turkish president, a day after the consultations in Jeddah, said that at the upcoming meeting with the Russian president, he would again offer his mediation in the peace talks between Moscow and Kiev according to the formula “there will be no winners in the war and no losers in the peace process.”
Incidentally, in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia also presented its plan for a peaceful settlement. What order will he be in? China has its own, countries in Africa also have. Erdogan, it turns out, has something on his mind too. Under such circumstances, pushing the “Zelensky plan” becomes more and more difficult. Because it is “peaceful” in name only, and at its core lies the eternal conflict with Russia. But this option, apparently, does not inspire everyone.
Translation: ES
Subscribe to our YouTube channel:
and for the channel in Telegram:
Share on your profiles, with friends, in groups and on pages. In this way, we will overcome the limitations, and people will be able to reach the alternative point of view on the events!?
#Zelenskys #plan #bottom #meeting #conflict #Ukraine #ended
