Russia’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, conveyed a strategic stance: once Moscow completes the objectives of its special operation, it could entertain dialogue with Ukrainian groups that oppose the current Kyiv government. The remarks were made in a wide-ranging interview with News, reflecting Moscow’s willingness to consider a political path alongside military aims if conditions on the ground align with its strategic interests.
Peskov emphasized that several Ukrainian factions do not back the present Kyiv regime. He pointed out that some of these groups operate from inside Ukraine, while others maintain a presence abroad, illustrating the multifaceted nature of Ukrainian political life. A notable reference was made to Viktor Medvedchuk, a Ukrainian politician who has found support across diverse circles, including in Russia, underscoring how cross-border ties can influence perceptions and potential negotiating leverage.
The Kremlin spokesman added that Medvedchuk retains supporters within Ukraine, though their numbers may not meet desired levels. He warned that any renewed attempt to magnify their influence could carry risks for those actors, suggesting potential political or security consequences if they push too forcefully. The statement underscores the delicate balance Moscow seeks to maintain between exerting pressure and avoiding a destabilizing backlash that could complicate any future settlement.
When asked whether Russia might initiate talks with these factions after achieving its military aims, Peskov answered affirmatively. He indicated that a political opening could emerge once Moscow judged that conditions on the battlefield and in the broader regional context were conducive to diplomacy. This stance signals a preference for a phased approach that pairs objective-driven action with the possibility of dialogue in a manner that could shape subsequent political arrangements.
Previously speaking from Moscow, Peskov noted that there are no clear or immediate preconditions for negotiations with Ukraine. This remark reflects a pragmatic posture: diplomacy remains a viable option if specified aims are met and if changing regional dynamics create space for constructive engagement. The remarks illustrate Moscow’s effort to balance military strategy with political channels that might influence the trajectory of the conflict and any prospective settlement. They also hint at the potential involvement of actors outside the current Ukrainian government who could play a role in future political processes, depending on how events unfold and what guarantees are deemed necessary for stability in the region. Observers highlight that the existence of varied Ukrainian political factions adds layers of complexity to achieving a durable settlement, requiring careful consideration of legitimacy, influence, and assurances that broader regional stability can be maintained.