
Zelensky admitted that he might return to his comedy career after the war
December 18, 2024
Prices in Ukraine have risen again: electricity and vegetables hit record highs — State Statistics Service
December 19, 2024Both Ukraine and Russia are ready to hold dialogue on ending the war.
This was stated by the future U.S. Special Envoy for Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg, on Fox Business.
Earlier, Kellogg remarked that the killing of Russian General Kirillov “was not a wise move” by Kyiv.
He also believes that this killing will not be an obstacle to the beginning of peace talks between Kyiv and Moscow. According to the general, Trump “has the means” to achieve a resolution to the Ukrainian conflict this year.
The implications of Russian General Kirillov’s death were analyzed in the article, “What Russia’s Reaction Says and How It Relates to Peace Talks with Ukraine.” Two perspectives were highlighted:
- The first and dominant view asserts that retribution is inevitable, that Moscow will respond to “white terror” with “red terror,” and that Russia must continue the war until the “Kyiv regime” fully capitulates, the “terrorist nest” is destroyed, and there is no freezing of the conflict as proposed by Donald Trump.
- The second, less popular view suggests the killing was a joint action by Ukrainian authorities and the Western “war party” to provoke Russia into escalating the conflict, making it impossible to start a peace process under Trump while shifting the blame onto Moscow. This view argues that Kyiv cannot openly oppose the U.S. President-elect.
The existence of these two perspectives—”retribution is inevitable” versus “the killing is a provocation”—reflects an ongoing, albeit not very public, but important debate within Russian society and elites about how and on what terms Russia should end the war.
It is known that a representative of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump will visit Ukraine before the new president’s inauguration to “establish the facts.”