Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Politics

"Historic shit" and diplomacy: what Zelensky's response to Putin means for the negotiation process

In high-level diplomacy, it's not loud statements but concrete results that matter. In an interview with Piers Morgan, Zelensky dismisses historical disputes with Putin and prioritizes a swift end to the war — focusing on the security of Ukrainians and concrete agreements.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

February 19, 2026 · 2 min read

"Historic shit" and diplomacy: what Zelensky's response to Putin means for the negotiation process
Володимир Зеленський (Фото: Офіс президента)

Why this matters

The president is shaping the framework for talks: instead of diving into historical disputes, Volodymyr Zelensky is showing a pragmatic approach — minimizing time and political losses and focusing on ceasefire mechanisms and security guarantees. This message is addressed not only to Putin but also to Western partners assessing Kyiv’s diplomatic readiness.

What Zelensky said

"I don't need to waste time on historical questions, on the reasons why he started, on all that, which, to me, is shit... To end this war and by diplomatic means I don't need all that historical shit, really"

— Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine (interview with Piers Morgan)

In the same conversation the president added that he has no desire to descend into personal insults, but insists on a practical agenda: a rapid end to hostilities and concrete security guarantees for Ukraine.

Ukraine's position: focus on results

Instead of arguments about history, Kyiv is betting on mechanisms and results: a ceasefire, the return of prisoners, verified borders, and security guarantees. This approach is logical — historical debates risk becoming a tool for delaying the process, and the price is human lives and territory.

What this means for negotiations

First, a signal to partners: Ukraine is ready to negotiate, but on its own terms — with an emphasis on security and implementing agreements, not on emotional or pseudo-historical claims. Second, it changes the tone of the Geneva-format talks: the emphasis shifts from ideology to practical steps, where assessment will be based on implementation rather than rhetorical gestures.

Context: Geneva talks

Following the third round, the president noted progress on the military front, but political issues saw limited advancement. The Ukrainian delegation is preparing for the fourth round in Switzerland; details will be available after receiving the full report from the negotiators.

"I have nothing personal against him. No emotions... I'm just trying to end this war"

— Volodymyr Zelensky, President of Ukraine (interview with Piers Morgan)

Implications and outlook

The tone of the statement has a practical purpose: to mobilize international attention on concrete steps, not on historical disputes that Russia could use to legitimize its actions. Next, the move is on partners — from words to instruments: sanctions, diplomatic pressure, and security guarantees must be transformed into mechanisms that ensure the implementation of agreements.

The question remains: will international actors agree to shift their support into a format that will allow Kyiv’s diplomatic focus to translate into real results? The speed and durability of any peaceful settlement depend on that.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026