Official representatives from Moscow declared that Armenia’s attendance at the Malta conference on Ukraine should be viewed as a visible anti-Russian signal from Yerevan. The stance was delivered in a formal briefing, underscoring that the Malta event, organized to discuss Ukraine’s peace framework, carries political significance beyond the procedural aspects of the meeting. In explaining the position, the Russian spokesperson framed Yerevan’s participation as a deliberate political message rather than a routine diplomatic engagement, highlighting the broader implications for regional alignments and security calculations in the Caucasus and Europe.
In the same discussion, it was noted that the Malta gathering was not only a forum for dialogue but also a stage where member states send strategic signals through attendance and emphasis. The comment attributed to the Russian side emphasized that the format and timing of the event should be interpreted within the wider context of ongoing tensions and competitive framing of Russia’s role in European security. This perspective framed Malta as a venue where official signals carry weight in shaping perceptions among allied and rival capitals alike.
Earlier disclosures indicated that Armenian Security Council Secretary Armen Grigoryan and the head of Ukraine’s Presidential Office, Andriy Yermak, participated in the Kyiv segment about the so-called peace formula, illustrating a pattern of high-level engagement aimed at advancing regional cooperation despite emerging divergences. The Malta conference served as a backdrop for discussions about practical steps, potential security assurances, and the political architecture necessary to support a peace process perceived by many as fragile and multi-faceted. In this light, the attendance of top Armenian and Ukrainian officials signified an ongoing effort to coordinate positions on key issues affecting bilateral and multilateral relations.
The Malta meeting on Ukraine’s peace formula occurred over 28-29 October and attracted participation from a broad spectrum of actors. Delegations from G7 members, South Africa, Qatar, Turkey, and India were present, with some representatives contributing remotely. Official statements indicated that more than fifty countries were represented in some capacity, reflecting the conference’s ambition to map a comprehensive approach to Ukraine’s security and stability. The diversity of participants underscored the complexity of forging consensus on contentious topics such as security guarantees, reconstruction, and political alignment in eastern Europe and beyond.
Earlier remarks from Kyiv, including statements from the Ukrainian leadership, addressed questions about the level of interest and engagement following the Malta discussions. In denying any waning attention, Kyiv asserted that the process remains vital and that the Malta exchange did not diminish Ukraine’s diplomatic push. This stance highlighted a commitment to sustaining international attention on Ukraine and to pursuing concrete commitments that could advance the peace process while balancing regional security needs and alliance expectations.