If we look directly at the peace process and also the corruption scandal, then what state is Ukraine in right now?

Those two things are certainly uncomfortable for Ukraine to take into account in negotiations, but I think, if we are talking about the corruption scandal, then the claim is that President Zelenskyy reacted a bit too late. But that said, the actual decision to remove [former chief of office Andriy] Yermak is a positive message, and shows that the rule of law is functioning in Ukraine. Let us say that America does not have that much leverage to force peace talks in a direction more favorable to them, as the very beginning of the negotiations, the draft of the agreement, was really so terrible that inevitably there will be some major changes happening.

What changes are there right now? Do we have any knowledge of that?

What is first and foremost known is that the harder points have clearly been punted on to the later, final stage. These have not yet been discussed so much as the media has written about them. Probably it is easier for Ukraine to agree to the points where the U.S. wants to bring Russia back into the global economic system or to make bilateral agreements with Russia. Certainly, it will be extremely complicated for Ukraine to agree to territorial concessions, and this is not at all tied to whether there is a corruption case or whether Zelenskyy is president. In the same way, Ukraine probably cannot agree to restrictions on its armed forces or their equipment.

How well is Ukraine holding up against all this pressure right now?

I think that it is doing so quite well. In that respect, Ukraine has demonstrated that it wants to be part of the talks. They have made their proposals; their representation is at a very high level. I believe this is what they want to clearly show to the President Trump administration, that Russia does not take this process as seriously as Ukraine does, something we have also seen earlier this year. This active stance from Ukraine is a clear tactic to reveal when Russia will start making additional demands or refuse proposals.

U.S. President Donald Trump has already said that this corruption scandal does not help the peace talks. Has President Volodymyr Zelenskyy lost credibility, in the eyes of Americans?

Perhaps I wouldn't focus so much on what Trump says about the corruption scandal, because I think America itself should look far more seriously at corruption cases tied to Trump's close circle. The fact that Zelenskyy did react and removed Yermak is a clear sign that the rule of law works. At the same time, we can ask about similar situations in America, where the functioning of the rule of law is under a very big question mark today.

But has Zelenskyy lost some form of trust?

This has certainly been a stain on his lapel, but I can see that in Ukraine, there are enough people who could replace Yermak. Zelenskyy has certainly operated with very strong popular backing, and I don't see the people deserting Zelenskyy in these peace talks. Rather, there are voices inside Ukraine, and this is the majority view, that the imposed peace deal in its original form would have represented a capitulation.

At the same time, it has been said in the corridors that the Americans have wanted to get rid of Andriy Yermak for a long time. Does this give Zelenskyy any room to maneuver in these talks now?

Zelenskyy surely has a somewhat more positive image with Americans now. If this demand had been made earlier, then this could be seen as a goodwill gesture by Zelenskyy. But we must also note that American demands on Ukraine's internal decisions often overlap with Russia's demands, but that is not the most democratic approach to this process.

Why has Yermak become a stumbling block for one side or another?

It became clear that Yermak's power reach was huge. He was seen as the number two in Ukraine by power position, but at the same time, he was also the most unpopular person in Ukraine. His power reach depended mainly on the network he built. He appointed his people to different posts and basically tried to keep everything under his control. It is claimed that he attempted to obstruct the corruption probe until the last moment, and that he also tried to remove the head of the agency handling the investigation.

Coming back to the peace negotiations, another round between Ukrainians and Americans took place on Sunday in the U.S., in Florida. How much is now known about what was achieved there?

Again, very little has leaked or is known. What is quite symbolic is that next to the foreign minister, the American delegation included [special envoy to the Middle East Steve] Witkoff and Trump's son-in-law Jared Kushner, who clearly represent the business interests that the Trump administration is trying to push on Ukraine through these talks. This is harmful from Ukraine's point of view, because essentially Ukraine is being used as a bargaining chip in Russia–US relations.

Who needs Ukrainian peace the most right now?

This is a difficult question. Naturally, it is needed most by Ukraine and the people of Ukraine. But the process we are in – it seems that President Trump wants to end the war sincerely. The problem is that he does not care on what terms the war ends. He needs another tick as a global peacemaker. Of course, Russia is also in a very hard position. But we must understand that Vladimir Putin cannot enter this agreement without losing face – especially not in a form where they fail to take the four regions. These have been written into the Russian constitution, and presenting this as a victory is extremely hard. I would say Russia desperately needs peace, but it is also the hardest side to achieve it.

Why have Europeans still not managed to secure a seat at the negotiation table? Again and again, we come back to it – Europe seems sidelined. Why?

Europeans need to look at themselves. Here in the Baltics and Nordic region, less so, because we are among the biggest supporters of Ukraine, but the fact is, Europe has continued with the same strategy for years. The level and volume of aid is exactly calibrated so that Ukraine won't collapse, but not enough to give Ukraine a chance to succeed on the battlefield.

When we talk about what Europe should do differently, Europe should clearly understand that America is openly interested in building business relations with Russia, and in that sense, Europe is supporting Ukraine alone. This needs to be realized fast, and additional investments should be increased primarily in Ukraine's war industry, and of course, Europe must continue developing its own critical capabilities. When we talk about replacing the U.S., the priority is intelligence capability development.

Why are we unable to get our own things done? Frozen assets are a very good example. Why can't we deal with those?

One major reason is certainly internal political developments in different countries. If we look at western or southern European countries, it is clear that their budgets are extremely tight, and writing in additional investments for Ukraine or even their own defense capabilities is difficult. Russia's propaganda activity also certainly plays a role here.

The prime minister of Belgium even used a classical Russian propaganda narrative by saying that the transfer of frozen assets to Ukraine would hurt the negotiation process. We have heard the same narrative repeatedly from the United States administration.

Are the European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte too cautious on Ukraine?

I think both have acted to the best of their knowledge, and they have believed it is still possible to retain America among the ranks of Ukraine's supporters. But I believe now it is the last moment to understand that, unfortunately, the current Donald Trump administration is no longer a supporter of Ukraine. If we compare the stance of President Joe Biden toward Ukraine with that of Trump's stance toward Ukraine, they are 180 degrees opposed.

There has been a lot of talk about guarantees that different countries should give Ukraine, but do we have any new information now about what these guarantees could exactly be?

There is no new information on that, but it can be added that if the U.S. demands that Ukraine sign the peace deal before security guarantees are offered, this is a clear trap which Ukraine must not step into. Considering how rapidly President Donald Trump changes his positions, it is vital for Ukraine to receive security guarantees before signing any agreement.

--

Follow ERR News on Facebook and X and never miss an update!