Ukraine seeks to end war but will take no unilateral steps, Sybiha says

Ukraine’s stated goal is to end the war through diplomacy. Foreign Minister Andrii Sybiha said Ukraine has realistic proposals and solutions. He presented a partial ceasefire and a complete cessation of hostilities as possible steps toward peace. He also stressed that any arrangement must be fair.

The article gives two concrete examples of Ukraine’s readiness. It is prepared to discuss a partial halt in fighting, or a full stop to hostilities. It is also ready for a trilateral meeting in the United Arab Emirates. These proposals create possible settings for negotiations rather than requiring Ukraine to act alone.

Sybiha said Ukraine would use every opportunity to bring peace closer. However, he made clear that Ukraine would not take unilateral steps. The next stage therefore depends on diplomatic contacts and whether other participants engage with Ukraine’s proposals on fair terms.

“No unilateral steps” means Ukraine does not intend to act alone in changing the situation on the ground or advancing an agreement. Sybiha paired this position with Ukraine’s demand that any arrangement be fair. The statement matters because a ceasefire or peace process can be weakened if only one side changes its conduct.

In the article’s example, Ukraine says it is ready for a partial ceasefire and a complete cessation of hostilities. It does not say Ukraine will impose either measure without coordination. Instead, the proposals are presented as diplomatic solutions that should involve reciprocal participation and clear terms.

This position leaves the door open to negotiations while setting a condition for Ukraine’s participation. Ukraine says it wants to end the war and will use every opportunity to bring peace closer. But progress would require the other participants to engage rather than expecting Ukraine to move first alone.

A partial ceasefire is limited. It may cover particular areas, periods, or types of military activity, while other hostilities could continue outside its scope. A complete cessation of hostilities is broader. It aims to end all fighting between the parties, not merely suspend selected actions.

The article presents both as realistic options for Ukraine. Sybiha said Ukraine is ready for a partial ceasefire and a complete cessation of hostilities. This wording shows a difference in scale: one is a narrower pause, while the other seeks a comprehensive end to hostilities. Both would still need fair and workable arrangements.

The article does not specify which locations, activities, or timetable a partial ceasefire would cover. It also does not describe implementation details for a complete cessation. Those points would need clarification through diplomacy. Sybiha said Ukraine would consider every opportunity to bring peace closer, including a proposed trilateral meeting in the United Arab Emirates.

The article explicitly names five countries in the diplomatic picture: Ukraine, Russia, Finland, Norway, and the United Arab Emirates. Ukraine is the country seeking to end the war and presenting proposals. Russia is represented in the reported phone calls by President Vladimir Putin. Finland and Norway are supporting diplomatic efforts through their leaders’ contacts.

Finnish President Alexander Stubb and Norwegian Prime Minister Jonas Gahr Støre spoke by phone with Putin. They later spoke with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky. Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen and Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide discussed those calls with Sybiha in Helsinki.

The United Arab Emirates has a possible hosting role. Sybiha said Ukraine was ready for a trilateral meeting there, although the article does not name the proposed participants beyond describing it as trilateral. The contacts therefore connect Ukraine, Russia, Finland, and Norway, while the UAE could provide a meeting location.

Phone calls by Finnish and Norwegian leaders matter because they create direct political channels involving both sides of the war. The article says their leaders spoke with Russian President Vladimir Putin and later held conversations with President Volodymyr Zelensky. Such contacts can help leaders exchange positions quickly and keep diplomacy active.

The calls also connect national leaders with Ukraine’s peace efforts. Sybiha discussed them with Finnish Foreign Minister Elina Valtonen and Norwegian Foreign Minister Espen Barth Eide in Helsinki. He called this active support for Ukraine’s diplomatic efforts and the peace process. The contacts therefore provide communication beyond Ukraine’s own direct proposals.

The article does not say that the calls produced an agreement or changed Russia’s position. Their immediate importance is diplomatic: they keep conversations open and allow Finland and Norway to support communication with both governments. Sybiha said Ukraine would use every opportunity to bring peace closer, so these contacts may help prepare further negotiations.

A trilateral meeting could make negotiations more focused by bringing three participants into the same discussion. They could hear one another’s positions directly, test proposals, and identify which issues require further work. This matters because Ukraine says it has realistic solutions but will not take unilateral steps.

Sybiha said Ukraine was ready for such a meeting in the United Arab Emirates. The article does not identify the three participants or set a date. It does show that the proposed meeting would fit within wider contacts involving Ukraine, Russia, Finland, and Norway. The UAE would provide the proposed venue.

The meeting could clarify whether a partial ceasefire or a complete cessation of hostilities is acceptable to the participants. It could also establish whether arrangements would be fair and reciprocal. However, the article reports no agreement resulting from the proposal. Its effect would depend on attendance, the agenda, and the participants’ willingness to negotiate.

Ceasefires usually require more than one side because fighting involves opposing forces. One government can announce a pause, but that announcement cannot control the other side’s actions. Agreement defines what must stop, where it applies, and when it begins. Without shared terms, each side may understand the pause differently.

Monitoring provides a way to check whether the agreed conditions are being followed. Reports from observers or other accepted channels can identify alleged violations and reduce disputes about what happened. Enforcement or agreed responses give the arrangement consequences when parties do not comply. These mechanisms make a ceasefire more than a promise.

The article does not describe a monitoring or enforcement plan. It does say Ukraine will not take unilateral steps and that any arrangement must be fair. That position reflects the need for reciprocal participation. Whether a partial ceasefire or complete cessation becomes practical would depend on agreement and implementation by the relevant sides.