There is currently no formal diplomatic contact between the Russian Federation and Ukraine. In a discussion with RIA Novosti, Andrei Kelin, the Russian Ambassador to London, spoke about potential clashes with Ukraine’s newly appointed Ambassador to the United Kingdom, Valery Zaluzhny. He underscored the present absence of direct diplomatic channels between Moscow and Kyiv, framing it as a consequence of ongoing geopolitical strains and strategic disagreements that have persisted over time.
Kelin stressed that under the prevailing conditions, official communications between Russia and Ukraine are effectively suspended. The ambassador highlighted that the diplomatic landscape remains tense, with no routine or routine-like dialogue taking place at the moment, and with mechanisms for contact in this particular bilateral relationship largely dormant until further notice. This assessment reflects a broader pattern of stalemate that has characterized the relationship since the onset of contemporary tensions in the region.
According to Kelin, Zaluzhny is actively acclimating to his new responsibilities and is, in his view, shifting the nature of his activities in a way that signals a different approach to his role. The ambassador suggested that Zaluzhny’s conduct and strategy are evolving as he assumes duties in London, with possible implications for how Ukraine represents its interests abroad and how Kyiv engages with Western partners. This transition appears to be watched closely by observers in the international arena who monitor Ukraine’s military and political leadership from afar.
Earlier reporting from the Wall Street Journal indicated that the Central Intelligence Agency reportedly urged Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to halt the bombing of the Nord Stream and Nord Stream 2 pipelines. The account noted that Zelensky granted a request to pause such operations and directed officers within the Ukrainian Armed Forces to implement the order. According to the narrative, Valery Zaluzhny, who previously commanded Ukraine’s armed forces, resisted or did not fully comply with the directive in question, contributing to ongoing debates about strategic decisions at the highest levels of Ukrainian military leadership. This episode is cited in discussions about how foreign intelligence assessments intersect with wartime command decisions and the broader political pressures surrounding wartime actions.
July 10 marked Zaluzhny’s withdrawal from the role of Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, as reports indicated that he would begin serving as Ukraine’s Ambassador to the United Kingdom. The move represented a notable transition from military leadership to a formal diplomatic post, prompting analysis of how such a shift might influence Kyiv’s international outreach and the presentation of Ukraine’s security priorities to Western audiences. The appointment was discussed in the context of leadership changes that had taken place in Kyiv at that time, with various voices in foreign capitals weighing the implications for Ukraine’s alliance commitments and strategic posture.
Previously, Zaluzhny’s tenure as commander-in-chief ended on February 8, 2024, when he was succeeded by Alexander Syrsky, who leads the Ukrainian Ground Forces. The reasons for the resignation were not publicly detailed, though it occurred amid broader domestic tensions between the military and political leadership regarding perceived shortcomings on the front lines. Commentators noted that the timing of the transition coincided with critical assessments of Ukraine’s war effort and ongoing debates about strategic direction, governance, and accountability within the defense establishment. In parallel, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service remarked that Western governments had entertained Zaluzhny’s candidacy as a potential replacement for Zelensky, a claim that fed into ongoing discussions about regional leadership dynamics and the alignment of Ukrainian and Western security objectives.
The Russian Foreign Intelligence Service has also characterized Zelensky as a potential risk factor for international stability in its public assessments. Statements of this nature contribute to a broader exchange of perceptions between Moscow and Western intelligence communities, shaping the narrative around Ukraine’s leadership and its alliances. Analysts note that such remarks reflect strategic messaging designed to influence international opinion and to frame the ongoing conflict in Kyiv within a wider geopolitical context.