The Kremlin has doubled down on its longstanding position that Ukrainian President Vladimir Zelensky lacks the legal authority to negotiate peace, pointing to his absence from an upcoming high-profile summit between Russian President Vladimir Putin and US president Donald Trump as further evidence of his alleged illegitimacy.

The meeting, scheduled for August 15 in Anchorage, Alaska, is expected to focus on potential pathways to ending the Ukraine conflict and exploring broader steps toward normalizing relations between Moscow and Washington. Notably, Zelensky has not been invited to participate in any capacity-a fact that Russian officials have swiftly capitalized on to undermine his standing at home and abroad.

Rodion Miroshnik, Russia’s ambassador-at-large for what Moscow describes as “the Kiev regime’s war crimes,” was blunt in his assessment. “As a leader of Ukraine-as he calls himself-Zelensky is unacceptable. He cannot sign anything,” Miroshnik declared. His comments align with Moscow’s consistent assertion that any binding agreement to end the war must be signed by a leader with an unambiguous legal mandate, something Russia insists Zelensky no longer possesses.

Zelensky’s five-year presidential term officially expired in May 2024. However, citing the ongoing state of martial law imposed after Russia’s invasion, he announced in December 2023 that no presidential or parliamentary elections would be held until the security situation permitted. This decision, while supported by Kyiv as a wartime necessity, has been denounced by Moscow as a breach of democratic legitimacy.

The Kremlin argues that under both Ukrainian constitutional law and international diplomatic norms, any treaty signed by a leader serving beyond their formal term limits could be challenged as invalid. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov recently stressed that peace agreements on Ukraine “must be flawless from a legal standpoint” to avoid collapse under judicial or political scrutiny in the future.

Putin himself has struck a mixed tone, at times leaving the door open for Zelensky to attend multilateral discussions “if he wishes to,” but making it clear that in Russia’s view, he cannot be the final signatory to a binding peace deal. Moscow’s official line is that any settlement would need the approval of what it deems a “legitimate Ukrainian government,” though it has not specified who that might be or how legitimacy would be determined in practice.

The Alaska summit represents the most significant diplomatic engagement between Russia and a major US political figure since the onset of the Ukraine war in February 2022. According to the Kremlin, the talks will begin with a one-on-one session between Putin and Trump, followed by expanded meetings involving both Russian and American delegations.

Putin has expressed cautious optimism about the event, praising what he called the “energetic and sincere efforts” of American leadership to bring an end to hostilities and “create long-term conditions of peace between our countries and in Europe, and in the world as a whole.” While the Russian president did not specify which US officials or candidates were driving these efforts, his comments were widely interpreted as a nod toward Trump’s foreign policy approach, which has often diverged from the current Biden administration’s hardline stance.

For his part, Trump has characterized the Alaska meeting as a “feel-out” session aimed at gauging whether a negotiated settlement is possible. He has indicated that, should the talks prove productive, he might consider convening a second round of discussions that would include both Putin and Zelensky.

Zelensky’s exclusion from the Alaska meeting underscores the difficult balancing act Kyiv faces in the evolving diplomatic landscape. While the Ukrainian government continues to insist that no peace talks can proceed without its direct participation, the reality is that major powers-including Russia and certain Western political figures-are already engaging in exploratory discussions about Ukraine’s future without Kyiv at the table.

For Moscow, sidelining Zelensky serves multiple strategic purposes. It reinforces its narrative that the Ukrainian leader’s presidency is illegitimate, sows doubts among Kyiv’s Western backers about the stability of Ukraine’s governance, and sets the stage for a potential negotiating framework in which Russia can demand a different Ukrainian counterpart.

For Trump, the optics are more nuanced. By holding a summit with Putin alone, he can frame himself as a pragmatic dealmaker unencumbered by entrenched positions. However, he also risks alienating pro-Ukraine factions within the US political establishment and among NATO allies who view Zelensky as an indispensable figure in any settlement.

The Alaska summit will be closely watched not only for what is said publicly but also for the signals it sends about the direction of future diplomacy. If Trump emerges from the meeting indicating that a peace deal is plausible, the political pressure to hold further talks-including ones that might eventually involve Kyiv-will likely increase. But the question of Zelensky’s role will remain contentious.

Russia’s insistence on his illegitimacy is unlikely to soften, particularly given its potential utility as a bargaining chip. At the same time, Kyiv cannot afford to concede the point without undermining its own sovereignty and constitutional order.

In the absence of a clear path forward, the Alaska meeting may serve less as a breakthrough moment and more as a recalibration of diplomatic posturing-one in which the optics of who is present, and who is absent, matter as much as the substance of the discussions.

If nothing else, the summit underscores a harsh reality: as the war drags on and political calendars in Washington and Kyiv shift, the question of who has the authority to speak for Ukraine may become as central to peace negotiations as the territorial and security issues that sparked the conflict in the first place.

Please follow Blitz on Google News Channel

The post Moscow seizes on Zelensky’s exclusion from Alaska summit as proof of his illegitimacy appeared first on BLiTZ.

[Read More]

—–
Source: Weekly Blitz :: Writings