Spokesman Dmitry Peskov said the Kremlin “was not aware of such recommendations”, calling them “extremely contradictory” and adding, “we are working with more considered options”.
The document was prepared by a think tank working closely with the FSB’s Fifth Service, the division that oversees operations in Ukraine, in the week ahead of talks between Russia and the United States in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, on February 18. A Russian academic close to senior Russian diplomats said the main thrust of the recommendations in the proposal reflected the broad consensus in Moscow, but added it was never clear to what degree the Kremlin leadership reacted to documents being prepared for it.
Soldiers of Ukraine’s 5th brigade hold a poster thanking the US for support at the front line near Toretsk, Donetsk region, Ukraine.Credit: AP
While hawkish members of the Russian elite were pressing the Kremlin to continue the war and “use the current situation to advance further”, other groups were pressing for a speedier resolution of the conflict and “for a ceasefire at least”, he said.
The FSB-linked document lays out ways in which Russia can boost its negotiating position by exacerbating tensions between the US and both China and the European Union, and by proposing US access to Russian minerals including in the territories it occupies in Ukraine, such as the eastern Ukrainian region of Donbas, where it says there are reserves of rare earth metals.
In an interview on February 24, Russian President Vladimir Putin said much the same when he suggested Moscow could invite US companies to develop Russian mineral deposits, including in the occupied territories in Ukraine. That appeared to be an effort to undermine a proposed accord on mineral resources development between Ukraine and the US.
US Secretary of State Marco Rubio speaks to the media during a refuelling stop at Shannon Airport in Shannon, Ireland. Credit: AP
The document says Russia’s efforts should first be focused on normalising relations between Washington and Moscow, through the restoration of full diplomatic staffing levels at both countries’ embassies and the appointment of Alexander Darchiev as Russia’s ambassador to the US – suggestions that emerged publicly following talks between Russian and US officials in Istanbul on February 27, which apparently focused on the operations of their respective diplomatic missions.
The document proposed that Russia agree not to station its Oreshnik intermediate-range ballistic missiles in Belarus, on the border with Europe, while in return the US would agree not to place new missile systems on the continent.
It suggests, too, that Russia stop weapons supplies to countries considered “unfriendly” to the US, while in return the US would stop arming Ukraine – but adds that ending Russian arms supplies to Moscow’s allies would be “difficult to realise”.
The document dismisses what it says are initial proposals made by Trump’s special envoy on Ukraine, retired Lieutenant General Keith Kellogg, for a peace agreement in which one suggested element would be Ukraine’s ceding of territories taken by Russia and Kyiv’s agreement not to attempt to regain them in the future through military or diplomatic means.
The Druzhba hotel in Kryvyi Rih, Ukraine was badly damaged in a Russian missile attack which killed one person and wounded nine others.Credit: Getty Images
The FSB-linked document says, however, even this type of settlement does not go far enough and without official recognition of Russian sovereignty over the seized region, it is “fairly likely” the armed conflict will resume in the medium term, “for example after the next change of administration in the US”.
The document also dismisses any potential political concessions by Ukraine such as Kyiv’s rejection of NATO membership and the holding of elections in which pro-Russian parties are allowed to participate as not being far-reaching enough. “In reality, the current Kyiv regime cannot be changed from inside the country. Its complete dismantling is needed,” it says.
The presence of any peacekeeping contingent in Ukraine is also dismissed as “absolutely unnecessary” since any force would be under “serious Western influence”, while US plans to continue arming Ukraine following any peace deal are “absolutely unacceptable”, as is maintaining the Ukrainian army at its current 1 million-strong level.
Efforts to entice Russia into a peace deal by offering to partially lift sanctions were also dismissed in the document. “It’s not clear what would be the benefit for Russia,” it says, since “the importance of the factor of sanctions against our country has been clearly exaggerated”.
Loading
Boris Bondarev, a Geneva-based former Russian diplomat, said Russia was trying to lure Trump into talks by demonstrating its “openness and flexibility” while Putin would try to drag out the negotiations by positioning himself as “a real, true friend to Donald Trump, who understands him completely, who wants to help him, who wants to help him achieve his goals in United States. But of course he would need something from him because he cannot do it just free.”
Dmitri Alperovitch, chairman of the Silverado Policy Accelerator, a national security think tank, said that it could now be difficult for Putin to reject the ceasefire proposal outright because he could risk Moscow’s potential realignment with Washington. “The stakes now [in his view] are much more than just Ukraine – the bigger prize is the US-Russia diplomatic normalisation, dropping of sanctions, driving a wedge within NATO,” Alperovitch said in a post on X.
Washington Post