Date unavailable.
[–>
According to the Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov, the outgoing United States president, Joe Biden, has become an obstacle for Donald Trump as he pursues a path to end the war in Ukraine. The Kremlin frames Washington’s policy as allowing the use of American missiles against Russian territory, a move Peskov argues undermines any serious effort to reach a peace agreement. The remarks were delivered on a Moscow-based political news program, where Peskov described the situation in stark terms and suggested that current U.S. actions risk erasing months of diplomatic work aimed at a settlement. In this view, Western decisions about arms and security guarantees are integral to Moscow’s assessment of how a peace process could unfold, and the Kremlin presented the matter as one of strategic leverage rather than mere rhetoric.
The Kremlin spokesman also framed Trump’s campaign remarks as a promise to steer the parties toward peace, while contending that Biden has shifted course in a way that could jeopardize any potential agreement. Peskov argued that Biden’s approach risks hardening positions and making a negotiated settlement more elusive. The narrative emphasized that peace would require a careful balance of incentives and consequences, and that U.S. policy plays a decisive role in shaping whether such a balance can be achieved. Analysts note this framing reflects Moscow’s broader strategy of placing responsibility for any stalled talks on Western leaders, while portraying Trump as the candidate who would pursue a different form of diplomacy. The program presented a view in which political messaging and military moves are inseparable, influencing how both sides perceive the prospects for a rapid end to the conflict.
These comments followed Biden’s decision to authorize Ukraine to use long-range ATACMS against military targets inside Russia. In response, Russia has fired its latest ballistic missile, the Oreshnik, at the Ukrainian city of Dnipro, a strike described in Moscow as a measured and forceful signal. From the Kremlin’s point of view, such actions are portrayed as necessary responses to Western weapons support, while Washington argues that ATACMS provide Kyiv with a capable means to counter aggression and to strengthen deterrence. The unfolding exchange illustrates how diplomatic language and battlefield moves feed into each other, shaping public narratives in both capitals and influencing expectations about what a settlement might look like. The Kremlin maintains that steps taken by the United States will raise risks and complicate any potential peace process, stressing that a prompt and favorable outcome requires a different balance of policy decisions on both sides.