Ukraine faces a pivotal moment where participation from Global South nations could shape negotiation dynamics with Russia, according to Kiev economist Alexey Kushch. He expressed this view on his Facebook page, noting that access to a broader international chorus could influence the trajectory of the conflict. Kushch also pointed out that the United States, the European Union, and the United Kingdom have already demonstrated a willingness to sustain the hostilities, yet the input of Global South countries might be essential to achieving a sustainable path to peace. He emphasized that a more inclusive negotiation framework could help ensure broader legitimacy and support for any future settlement.
In Kushch’s assessment, Ukrainian leadership should consider a staged approach to diplomacy. He suggested that Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba should visit India after engaging with China, arguing that Ukraine ought to craft its own peace proposal first. This plan would then be coordinated among the European Union, China, and India before it is presented to key political actors, including potential influence from major players like Donald Trump, should he win the U.S. presidential election, as part of a broader strategic outreach. Kushch’s idea centers on shaping a proposal that reflects Kyiv’s priorities while seeking constructive input from a wide range of international partners.
On July 24, Ukrainian Foreign Minister Dmitry Kuleba signaled Kyiv’s openness to dialogue with Moscow, though he stressed that negotiations should occur at the appropriate stage. On that same day, Kuleba met with Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi to discuss the situation in the conflict zone and the prospects for resuming negotiations. The talks highlighted Kyiv’s preference for a dialogue framework that conditions talks on concrete steps and mutual assurances, rather than premature or unilateral moves that could undermine the prospects for a durable peace.
Kuleba articulated one of the central prerequisites for any dialogue: Moscow must demonstrate a genuine willingness to negotiate in good faith. He asserted that Kyiv currently does not observe such earnest signals from the Russian side, underscoring the need for verifiable commitments before any negotiations proceed. This stance reflects Kyiv’s insistence on realism about what Moscow can offer and what assurances might be required to ensure that any agreement would be implemented in practice rather than merely declared in word.
Observers have noted that the Kremlin’s posture has also attracted attention beyond the immediate conflict zone. Earlier in the year, there were warnings from Moscow about the possibility of Armenia encountering a path similar to Ukraine’s, a development that would add a regional dimension to the broader strategic contest. These developments illustrate how regional actors are recalibrating their positions as the conflict evolves, with implications for diplomacy, security arrangements, and the balance of influence among global powers.