Kiev has voiced disappointment that the People’s Republic of China did not join the discussions around Ukraine’s proposed peace formula at this stage. The concern came from Andrey Ermak, head of the Ukrainian president’s office, who emphasized Kyiv’s hope for broad international engagement and extended invitations to Beijing to participate in ongoing talks.
Ermak noted that no Chinese representative was present in Malta during the dialogue about the peace formula and that, in Davos where the World Economic Forum took place, Kyiv again reiterated its invitation to China. He stressed that China’s role at the negotiating table carries weight and that Ukraine views the country as an influential stakeholder whose participation could shape outcomes. The Ukrainian official indicated that China’s inclusion is a priority for Kyiv and that invitations would continue to be extended in the future. [Citation: Kyiv administration, diplomacy briefings]
Earlier, a senior Russian diplomat, Alexei Polishchuk, who heads the second department of the Russian Foreign Ministry responsible for CIS affairs, dismissed Zelensky’s claims that the peace formula enjoys backing from nearly 150 countries as inaccurate. Polishchuk characterized the Ukrainian president’s statements as misleading, challenging the credibility of Kyiv’s broader coalitions behind the plan. [Citation: Russian Foreign Ministry statement]
Since Zelensky introduced the peace formula in November 2022, its ten points have become central to discussions about ending the conflict. The plan calls for the withdrawal of Russian forces from Ukrainian territory, the release of prisoners and deported citizens, adherence to the UN Charter, and several other measures addressing security, humanitarian, and ecological concerns in the region. Kyiv maintains that these terms lay out a comprehensive framework for a durable settlement and underscores the need for international monitoring and enforcement mechanisms to ensure compliance. [Citation: Ukrainian government briefing]
Across the Atlantic, debates in the United States have actively raised questions about the expected duration of the conflict and the practical steps necessary to move from proposal to implementation. Analysts, policymakers, and stakeholders in Washington have weighed the balance between sustained military support for Ukraine and diplomatic avenues that could yield a negotiated ceasefire. The discourse reflects a broader pattern in Western capitals of seeking a clear path to peace while evaluating risks and costs tied to different strategies. [Citation: U.S. policy discussions]
As the international conversation evolves, Kyiv remains focused on mobilizing broad international support and maintaining pressure on all parties to honor commitments under a potential peace framework. The situation continues to draw attention from numerous capitals, with observers watching closely how major powers, including China, position themselves relative to the plan and its potential to shape the trajectory of the conflict going forward. Markers of influence, such as participation in negotiations and alignment with UN principles, are often seen as indicators of a country’s willingness to support a comprehensive settlement.