The proposal, raised by Putin over the weekend as he signaled openness to discussing postwar security arrangements in Europe, was swiftly dismissed by EU officials who questioned both Russia’s intentions and Schroeder’s neutrality because of his longstanding ties to the Kremlin and Russian state energy companies.
“We would not be very wise to allow Russia to appoint a negotiator on our behalf,” Kaja Kallas told reporters during a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels.

Kallas said Schroeder’s close relationship with Putin made him unsuitable for any mediating role, adding that Moscow had shown no evidence it was prepared to engage sincerely in peace or security negotiations linked to the war in Ukraine.

Germany’s Europe minister, Gunther Krichbaum, also rejected the suggestion, saying Schroeder could not be considered an “honest broker” because of his political and business connections to Russia.

Schroeder, who served as German chancellor from 1998 to 2005, has maintained close personal ties with Putin and previously held senior roles in Russian state-controlled energy firms, relationships that have drawn sustained criticism across Europe since Russia’s 2022 invasion of Ukraine.

Ukrainian Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha similarly dismissed any role for Schroeder but said European governments could participate in negotiations complementary to ongoing U.S.-led diplomatic efforts aimed at ending the conflict.

A source familiar with the discussions said Sybiha proposed that European officials help mediate a narrower agreement between Russia and Ukraine to halt attacks on each other’s airports, describing the initiative as a more achievable objective than a comprehensive settlement to end the war.

The discussions reflect growing debate inside the EU over whether the bloc should eventually establish direct diplomatic channels with Moscow after more than four years of political isolation and sanctions imposed following Russia’s invasion.

Antonio Costa said last week he had begun consultations with European leaders on how the bloc should organize itself for possible future talks with Russia when conditions become appropriate.

Several ministers, however, argued the EU should intensify economic and political pressure on Moscow before considering formal negotiations or appointing any envoy.

Lithuanian Foreign Minister Kestutis Budrys said the immediate priority should be strengthening the bloc’s leverage against Russia rather than selecting mediators.

Austria’s foreign minister, Beate Meinl-Reisinger, said the EU should prepare to become more directly engaged in diplomacy with Moscow, while stressing that decisions on representation would be made by European governments, not Russia.

Addressing troops and military hardware assembled on Moscow’s Red Square for commemorations marking the Soviet Union’s victory over Nazi Germany in World War Two, Putin linked Russia’s ongoing military campaign in Ukraine to what the Kremlin has repeatedly described as a struggle against Western influence and military expansion.

“The great feat of the generation of victors inspires the soldiers carrying out the goals of the special military operation today,” Putin said, using Moscow’s official terminology for the war in Ukraine.“They are confronting an aggressive force armed and supported by the entire NATO bloc.

And despite this, our heroes move forward,” he added.Putin also said he believed Russia’s military campaign was justified, declaring: “I firmly believe that our cause is just.”The remarks came during Russia’s annual Victory Day celebrations, one of the country’s most important patriotic events, which the Kremlin has increasingly used to rally domestic support for the war in Ukraine since the conflict began in February 2022.

Russia has repeatedly accused NATO and Western governments of escalating the conflict through military assistance, intelligence sharing and weapons deliveries to Ukraine. NATO members have said their support is aimed at helping Ukraine defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity against Russia’s invasion.

The war has reshaped European security dynamics, prompting increased defense spending across NATO states and the expansion of the alliance with the accession of Finland and Sweden.

Victory Day ceremonies in Moscow have taken on heightened political significance since the start of the conflict, with Russian authorities portraying the war as part of a historic struggle against external threats and Western pressure.

When Ukrainian corporal Vadym Lietunov ran from the wreckage of his frontline position in late February, he believed he was heading toward safety. Instead, he entered a Russian dugout, beginning nearly two weeks of captivity underground with an enemy soldier who would eventually surrender alongside him.

Lietunov, a 34-year-old serviceman from the southern Ukrainian city of Odesa, had arrived at his frontline post only a day before heavy bombardment began. According to his account, Russian forces subjected the position to repeated attacks for six to seven hours daily using kamikaze drones and mortar fire.He and another Ukrainian soldier, identified as Sasha, spent their days repairing the damaged dugout, putting out fires with bottles of urine and rebuilding protective walls using sacks filled with clay.

“The enemy knew we were there. It was trying to kill us,” Lietunov said while receiving treatment at a rehabilitation center in Odesa after the incident.The attacks intensified when Russian drone operators deployed a Molniya drone carrying an anti-tank mine. One explosion near the dugout entrance left both soldiers concussed.

Several similar strikes followed before another drone dropped a mine directly above their foxhole.The blast destroyed the roof and fatally wounded Sasha, tearing off both of his legs. Lietunov said he tried to pull his fellow soldier free but quickly realized he was dead. Expecting another strike within minutes, he fled the destroyed position wearing only socks and ran toward what he believed was a nearby Ukrainian shelter.

He found a fortified dugout hidden among trees, with a blanket covering the entrance. Shouting for help, he entered and saw a uniformed soldier aiming an automatic rifle at him.“I thought my guys were inside,” Lietunov said. “Then I heard his accent. He was Russian.”The soldier, later identified as Nikita, ordered him into a small underground chamber and assured him he would not be shot because he was unarmed.

On the wall hung a makeshift Christian cross built from wooden planks with the words “save and protect” written across it.Although Nikita initially promised to release him the next morning, he did not. Lietunov said he spent the first days expecting execution at any moment and concluded that survival depended on gaining the trust of his captor.

Drawing on psychology books he had read as a teenager, Lietunov began observing Nikita closely. He described the Russian soldier as a former prisoner and drug addict who had been released from jail to fight in Ukraine. According to Lietunov, Nikita had previously fled combat, been detained, and then returned to the front. His commander, whom he described as Chechen, communicated orders by radio.

Nikita searched Lietunov’s clothes and belongings, reportedly looking for drugs and hidden tracking devices, influenced by Russian state narratives portraying Ukrainian soldiers as drug users fitted with GPS transmitters.The dugout itself reflected the harsh conditions facing frontline troops on both sides. Lietunov said Nikita received only a small daily ration delivered by drone: a packet of porridge, jam, and a bottle of water.

Letters from Russian schoolchildren were pasted on the walls, each carrying nearly identical messages of support.Despite frequently insisting that Russia had the strongest army in the world, Nikita was cold, hungry, and isolated, Lietunov said.He also described his captor as unstable. At times, Nikita would place a gun against his forehead and threaten to kill him. On several occasions, he stopped without explanation.

“He would say, ‘I’m going to kill you right now,’ and then suddenly change his mind,” Lietunov said.To avoid provoking suspicion, Lietunov deliberately presented himself as weak and harmless. He later developed gangrene in one of his toes and, believing he might die there, asked Nikita to shoot him outside so his body could be recovered by Ukrainian forces.Nikita refused, according to Lietunov, fearing exposure to drones and artillery.

Meanwhile, Lietunov’s own brigade, the 118th, assumed he had likely been killed. His commander informed his mother, Mariia, that there was a 95% chance her son would not return. She fainted after hearing the news, he said.His wife, Alesya, remained convinced he was alive. The couple, who have a five-year-old son named Andriy, had already endured years of war since Lietunov joined the military hours after Russia’s full-scale invasion in February 2022.

He had previously served in air defense and participated in operations linked to the liberation of Kherson.Inside the dugout, survival increasingly depended on water and trust. Nikita gave Lietunov one square of chocolate a day and a bottle cap of water. The Russian soldier complained about shortages and said troops were often forced to collect rainwater and even drink urine.

At one point, Nikita suggested surrendering to Ukrainian forces. Lietunov responded by describing the treatment of prisoners under the Geneva Conventions, including food, cigarettes, and regular conditions of detention. He said the subject came up five times.Eventually, when the dugout ran out of water, the two men left together in heavy fog. A Ukrainian drone hovered above them.

Lietunov used the moment to signal his identity, hanging a sign with his call-sign, “Cartman,” and his brigade number beside a tree.Initially, Ukrainian forces believed both men were Russian soldiers and prepared another strike. According to Lietunov, only after commanders checked his social media accounts did they realize the thin figure below was their missing comrade.A drone later dropped a radio, allowing direct communication with his brigade.

Lietunov carefully avoided provoking Nikita, fearing any sudden move could lead to violence. He arranged food deliveries, handing most of his share to the Russian soldier.“He had told me that when he was full, he was kind,” Lietunov said.Russian forces also continued sending supplies. One drone reportedly delivered an explosive device disguised as a log filled with TNT, which Nikita was ordered to place in the forest.

Lietunov said he remained uncertain until the final moment whether Nikita would surrender or kill them both.The standoff ended when thick fog allowed a Ukrainian armored vehicle to approach. Both men climbed into the back and were taken to Ukrainian brigade headquarters.There, Lietunov was reunited with fellow soldiers who had believed him dead. Nikita surrendered without resistance and destroyed his phone before entering custody.

Video recorded at the base showed him calmly stating that he had taken Vadym prisoner.Ukrainian security officers later transferred Nikita for interrogation. Lietunov said he requested that the Russian be treated properly, honoring a promise made during captivity. Officials indicated he could eventually be exchanged for Ukrainian prisoners of war.Now recovering after losing a toe, Lietunov remains on crutches in Odesa, reunited with his family.

“I was a prisoner,” he said. “But in the end, I came out with a prisoner.”

The Swedish Coast Guard boarded the 182-meter vessel Jin Hui on Sunday amid suspicions it was operating under a falsified Syrian flag, in what officials described as part of ongoing enforcement actions targeting ships believed to be circumventing Western sanctions on Russia.

The Swedish Prosecution Authority said the captain was detained on suspicion of using forged documents and breaching maritime safety regulations, specifically relating to inadequate seaworthiness. Prosecutor Adrien Combier-Hogg said the individual would be interrogated during the day, adding that coordination had been initiated with other national and international authorities.

Sweden’s Civil Defense Minister Carl-Oskar Bohlin said the vessel appears on sanctions lists maintained by the European Union, Britain and Ukraine, underscoring concerns that it may be linked to networks used to bypass restrictions imposed on Moscow following its invasion of Ukraine.

Western officials have increasingly focused on what they describe as a “shadow fleet” of aging, poorly insured vessels with opaque ownership structures, used to transport Russian oil and other commodities outside formal regulatory frameworks. These ships have raised safety and environmental concerns due to their condition and lack of oversight.

Sweden has conducted several recent boardings of vessels in its surrounding waters as part of broader efforts to enforce sanctions compliance and maritime safety standards in the Baltic region.

Speaking at the Peace Palace in The Hague, Guterres said violations of international law were increasingly visible at a time when the global system is under strain and power dynamics are shifting. He stressed that adherence to legal norms was “more important than ever” amid growing geopolitical tensions.

The commemorative session, attended by Willem-Alexander, highlighted both the legacy and current pressures facing the court, which adjudicates disputes between states. Guterres noted that the ICJ is currently handling a rising number of cases, reflecting both its relevance and the complexity of contemporary conflicts.

Recent high-profile proceedings include a case brought by South Africa against Israel alleging violations of the Genocide Convention in Gaza, as well as a landmark environmental advisory opinion issued last year that clarified states’ obligations on climate change and opened the possibility of reparations for non-compliance.

Despite its central role, Guterres said institutions such as the ICJ are increasingly being “questioned and challenged,” with erosion of respect for international law occurring not at the margins but “at the core” of the global system, including among states tasked with maintaining international peace and security.

He reiterated that ICJ rulings are legally binding under the UN Charter, even though the court lacks enforcement mechanisms, a limitation frequently cited by critics. He pointed to the court’s order directing Russia to halt its invasion of Ukraine, which was not followed, as an example of the gap between legal authority and political compliance.

Yuji Iwasawa echoed these concerns, warning of “troubling signs” of countries questioning multilateralism and the role of law in international relations. He said such trends place significant pressure on the global legal framework and underscore the fragility of the system.

Guterres framed the moment as a broader choice facing the international community between a rules-based order and one shaped by power politics, emphasizing that respect for international law remains a foundational obligation for all UN member states.

Geopolitics, markets, and technology intersected sharply this year, revealing deep anxieties about global stability, economic coordination, and the future of leadership.

The meeting made it clear that traditional alliances are under strain and that nations are reassessing how quickly and independently they must act in a rapidly changing world.

Europe emerged from Davos more united but also more cautious, having learned the cost of confronting U.S. pressure directly. Trump’s controversial remarks and actions related to Greenland crossed long-standing European red lines on territorial sovereignty, prompting rare resistance from European leaders.

While financial market reactions may have played a role in Trump stepping back, the episode badly shook Europe’s confidence in the transatlantic relationship.

European officials openly admitted that decision-making within the European Union is often too slow, and conversations in Davos focused heavily on accelerating collective responses to future crises.

Ukraine briefly faded into the background early in the meeting but returned to the spotlight as President Volodymyr Zelenskiy arrived for high-level talks.

Despite public statements suggesting progress, a peace agreement remained distant, with territorial disputes still unresolved.

The presence of a Russian envoy for talks with U.S. officials, the first such visit since the 2022 invasion, highlighted how geopolitical realities are reshaping diplomatic engagement.

Davos also became a forum for debating potential U.S. action against Iran, with leaders questioning not just the likelihood of intervention but the consequences of regime instability.

Economic discussions at Davos were dominated by uncertainty and concern over rising protectionism. Threats of U.S. tariffs against European allies heightened fears that the global trading system is fragmenting.

Business leaders repeatedly stressed the need for stability, predictability, and respect for the rule of law, qualities many felt were increasingly scarce.

These tensions strengthened arguments for diversifying trade away from over-reliance on the U.S. and building stronger regional and multilateral economic ties.

Financial leaders expressed cautious optimism about growth but warned of policy risks. Banking executives discussed challenges ranging from artificial intelligence disruption to regulatory pressure and consumer affordability.

Warnings were issued about proposals such as capping credit card interest rates, which some leaders argued could destabilize credit markets.

At the same time, crypto executives promoted stablecoins and blockchain as transformative tools, while traditional banks remained divided between experimentation and skepticism.

Concerns about asset bubbles, central bank independence, and long-term inflation lingered over market discussions.

Artificial intelligence was one of the most visible themes in Davos 2026, with major technology leaders making rare appearances. AI companies used the event to push enterprise adoption and reassure investors after months of valuation doubts.

Unlike late 2025, executives now expressed greater confidence that AI investment is moving from hype to practical implementation.

Still, worries about concentration of power, regulation, and long-term societal impact remained part of the conversation, underscoring that AI’s promise comes with complex trade-offs.

Overall, Davos 2026 reflected a world grappling with leadership unpredictability, shifting alliances, economic fragmentation, and technological acceleration. The meeting underscored that while global cooperation is under pressure, the urgency to adapt has never been greater.

The forum ended not with clear solutions but with a shared recognition that the global order is entering a more volatile and uncertain phase.

Global leaders left Davos aware that speed, adaptability, and trust will define the next chapter of international politics and economics.

Following extended discussions in Moscow between Putin and the US President’s special envoy Steve Witkoff, joined by senior adviser Jared Kushner, Russian officials stated that the dialogue was constructive. A Kremlin aide acknowledged that compromises had not yet been finalized, but emphasized that the talks represented an important beginning in aligning perspectives.

Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov reiterated that it would be inaccurate to say the proposals were rejected in full. Instead, he described the talks as a direct exchange of views, with some ideas accepted and others deemed unsuitable. This, he noted, was part of a normal negotiation process in which both sides work through disagreements to identify shared ground.

Peskov highlighted Russia’s appreciation for the diplomatic efforts being made by the US administration. He added that while the Kremlin values transparency, ongoing discussions would not be accompanied by detailed public updates, as discretion was essential to maintaining a productive environment for negotiations.

According to Peskov, expert-level teams from both sides are now working through the details of the proposals. These discussions are expected to produce tangible results that will pave the way for potential future engagements at the highest political level. The structured approach indicates a deliberate attempt to build a durable foundation for peace efforts.

The developments come amid a series of overlapping proposals from different international actors. A previous set of 28 US draft peace points circulated in November, prompting concerns among Ukrainian and European officials who felt they were overly accommodating to Moscow’s demands. European states later drafted their own counter-proposal, while new discussions in Geneva led the US and Ukraine to assemble what they described as an updated and refined peace framework.

Putin expressed unease with certain European suggestions, stating that some of the ideas were completely unacceptable to Russia. However, the ongoing talks illustrate that Moscow remains engaged in the broader diplomatic process, even while disagreements persist. The Russian president’s foreign policy aide, Yuri Ushakov, said the discussions with Witkoff covered a series of documents, including previous sets of proposals and new additions.

The outlines of the peace frameworks under discussion have not been disclosed publicly. Nonetheless, the continuity of dialogue and the acknowledgment that some US ideas have been accepted signal a potentially meaningful shift in tone. Both sides appear committed to repeated meetings if necessary, reflecting an understanding of the complexity of the issues at stake.

The diplomatic momentum suggests a shared desire to identify avenues for de-escalation. As expert teams continue to review, revise and refine proposals, the possibility of creating a balanced and practical peace framework becomes increasingly viable. While challenges remain, the reaffirmation of dialogue underscores a broader recognition that sustained communication is essential for progress.

In a global climate where conflicts carry far-reaching consequences, this renewed engagement between the US and Russia may help stabilize the international environment. With both parties expressing readiness for continued negotiations, the path toward a workable agreement remains open, setting the stage for future diplomatic breakthroughs.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov stated that Moscow prefers to wait for an official and detailed statement from Washington before drawing conclusions. “We understand that we need to wait for clearer statements, if any come,” Peskov told reporters, underlining that open communication remains key to maintaining balance during complex global developments.

The remarks came after U.S. President Donald Trump indicated he would seek a clear understanding of Ukraine’s intentions before making a final decision on the possible transfer of Tomahawk missiles. The U.S. president also emphasized his commitment to preventing escalation and pursuing a thoughtful approach to defense cooperation.

Analysts say the exchange reflects a cautious yet constructive phase in U.S.-Russia communication, as both nations navigate evolving security concerns while expressing their intent to avoid unnecessary confrontation.

Under previous administrations, the U.S. had generally announced new arms supplies to Ukraine only after deliveries were completed. Peskov’s comments suggest that Moscow is monitoring the current dialogue closely while maintaining diplomatic channels open for discussion and clarification.

Russian officials have consistently reiterated their stance on ensuring that any international arms movement does not contribute to heightened tensions. President Vladimir Putin, in a recent statement, emphasized that global security should remain the shared responsibility of all nations, highlighting that open dialogue and trust-building remain crucial pillars of peace.

Tomahawk missiles, known for their long range and precision, are typically used for strategic defense purposes. Russia’s call for clarity highlights the importance of transparency and information-sharing between major powers, which experts believe could help reduce uncertainty and strengthen confidence across the region.

While some observers describe the situation as delicate, diplomatic voices on both sides are calling for patience and mutual understanding. By choosing dialogue over speculation, Russia and the United States appear to be signaling a preference for diplomacy and structured communication, rather than confrontation.

The Kremlin’s message comes amid broader international conversations about maintaining balance and preventing the escalation of military tensions in Eastern Europe. Both Moscow and Washington have long acknowledged that constructive communication remains essential for ensuring regional and global peace.

Russia’s approach, focused on waiting for official clarification, underscores its commitment to responsible statecraft and measured response. This approach aligns with the global call for transparency, prudence, and continued cooperation in addressing international security challenges.

Observers believe that ongoing discussions about defense policies should serve as a foundation for deeper dialogue, mutual respect, and understanding between the two powers. As the situation develops, the emphasis remains on diplomacy, communication, and collective stability — values that continue to guide responsible nations in navigating a complex global landscape.