原文鏈接：https://medium.com/@giorgioprovinciali/c69093afb23a?sk=505ed733ad7234e0d14b59393aae1db9
Deadlock In Geneva
By: Giorgio Provinciali
Live from Ukraine ????????
Dnipro The Geneva stalemate is not a diplomatic incident but the logical consequence of a war whose fundamental objectives Moscow never considered negotiable.
On February 18, 2022, the Ukrainian Ministry of Defense had alreadydenounced52 Russian violations of the ceasefire established by the Minsk agreements, all occurring on that day alone. Meanwhile, Moscow-backed terrorists in charge of the self-proclaimed republics of Donetsk and Luhanskstageda mass evacuation of the local population to the Russian Federation,claimingthat Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky was about to order his military to go on the offensive in those territories.Absent from the Munich Security Conference, Vladimir Putindeclared:We will only negotiate with security guarantees.
The following day, two Ukrainian soldiersdiedof shrapnel wounds sustained in Russian attacks in Donbas. They were the first casualties of clashes fueled by Moscow as part of its planned full-scale invasion of Ukraine. Zelenskyannouncedthe news on the sidelines of the Munich Conference, reiterating his willingness to negotiate and even calling for the resumption of talks.The only thing we want is peace, hesaid, reiterating his gratitude to Washington and calling for a diplomatic path.Despite already having lost swathes of territory the size of Switzerland, the Netherlands, or Belgium, Ukraine had respected the ceasefire agreed two years earlier under the Minsk agreements but had been bombed in response.
After another four years of bombing,negotiations within the political group in Geneva reached a stalemate on February 19, 2026. The reason lies in the positions expressed by Vladimir Medinsky, one of the most well-known ideologues and historical revisionists among the current Russian elite.
Zelensky is nowdeclaringhimselfwilling to negotiate only in exchange for security guarantees, butthe curious mirroring of the rhetorical positions between the parties is only apparent.
Four years ago,Putin used the notion of security in an offensive-strategic sense: he demanded guarantees regarding Ukraines non-Euro-Atlantic integration, the permanent neutralization of the Ukrainian state, and the recognition of an exclusive sphere of influence.Security was therefore understood by Russia to be a limitation on others sovereignty.
Today, Zelensky uses the same linguistic formulation to express the opposite concept:preventing a repetition of the aggression against his countrythrough concrete multilateral commitments and verifiable deterrence and prevention mechanisms.
The stalemate in Geneva, therefore, stems not from a lack of formal willingness to engage in dialogue but from the incompatibility of the preconditions.
The Russian positions conveyed by Medinsky continue to be based on a distorted historical reading that denies Ukraines full subjectivity, on the claim of freezing military results as a basis for negotiations, on the imposition of a permanent veto on Ukrainian strategic choices, and on the implicit demand for international legitimacy of Russian crimes.
The rereading of the historical events preceding February 24, 2022, that Alla Perdei and I have been proposing day by day in our latest articles, reveals that, after another four years of bombing,Ukraine cannot accept a ceasefire without structural guarantees. More broadly, the experience of the 20142022 period also demonstrates thata freeze without deterrence only leads to the aggressors rearmament.
It is precisely this experience that makes itimpossible for Kyiv today to accept ambiguous formulas.
Negotiations work when both sides seek to reduce future uncertainty.
Here, the opposite occurs.
Bypresentingthe war not as aggression but as a means of historical rectification,Medinsky embodies the Russian states narrative function. He speaks of anatural historical space, downplays or reinterprets the darkest pages of Soviet history, and denies Ukraines autonomy and historical identity, calling it an artificial derivation.
This approach is consistent with the doctrineexpressedby Vladimir Putin in his 2021 essay on the historical unity of Russians and Ukrainians, whichpresentsUkraine not as a full historical subject but as part of a Russian continuum.
Medinsky is therefore not a simple negotiator but the most faithful interpreter of rashism that Putin could bring to a table, destined for historic ratification, not compromise.
For Kyiv, accepting these conditions would entail relinquishing sovereignty and institutionalizing future vulnerability. For Moscow, renouncing these conditions would mean admitting the failure of the original strategic objective.
The balance is therefore blocked bya negative symmetry: both sides view the concession as an existential threat.
On February 19, 2022, Zelenskyaskedto unblock negotiations while Ukrainian soldiers were dying under bombs. Putinrespondedby demanding security guarantees.
As of February 19, 2026, negotiations remain stalled because the Russian conditions amount to the political legitimacy of those bombs, to which Zelenskyrespondsby demanding security guarantees.
As long as Russia views negotiations as the ratification of a fait accompli and Ukraine views them as a means of preserving its sovereignty, every negotiating table Monaco, Minsk, or Geneva will remain structurally unstable.
This explains why,after four years, we are not only facing a failure of diplomacy but also the continuation of the war by other means.
The ongoing blackouts severely damaged our houses heating system in Western Ukraine while we were in the Donbas.
Without electricity, the pump couldnt circulate the liquid while the fire was lit. As a result, the system caught fire, and the whole house was at risk of burning. Fortunately, it did not, but the whole system needs to be changed, and the house needs to be restored. Tubes are all bent, walls are blackened by haze, and the heating system doesnt work, requiring an entirely new system.
We are doing our best since Allas parents live there, but theres still a lot to work on here, too, as the people around us are in no better situation.
Were renewing our fundraising campaign and thanking everyone who joins us in helping us restore what Russia is destroying. Even a small donation helps. Well keep you updated on developments.
Thank you all, dear friends ????????
日內瓦僵局
作者：Giorgio Provinciali
翻譯：旺財球球
烏克蘭前線報道????????
第聶伯（Dnipro）日內瓦的僵局不是一次外交事故，而是一場莫斯科從未把其根本目標視為可談判事項的戰爭的邏輯後果。
2022年2月18日，烏克蘭國防部已指控當天單日俄羅斯違反明斯克協議停火規定52次。與此同時，受莫斯科支持、掌控所謂頓涅茨克和盧甘斯克共和國的恐怖分子組織大規模疏散當地居民至俄羅斯，聲稱烏克蘭總統弗拉基米爾澤連斯基準備下令軍隊在那些地區發動進攻。缺席慕尼黑安全會議的弗拉基米爾普京宣稱：我們隻會在有安全保障的情況下談判。
次日，兩名烏克蘭士兵在頓巴斯遭俄方襲擊中因彈片傷身亡。成為莫斯科為其預謀對烏克蘭全麵入侵所挑起衝突的首批傷亡。澤連斯基在慕尼黑會議間隙宣布了這一消息，重申願意談判，甚至呼籲恢複會談。我們唯一想要的是和平，他表示，再次對華盛頓表示感謝並呼籲通過外交途徑解決。盡管已失去相當於瑞士、荷蘭或比利時麵積的大塊領土，烏克蘭仍遵守兩年前在明斯克協議下達成的停火，卻換來轟炸。
經曆又四年的轟炸，2026年2月19日，日內瓦政治小組的談判陷入僵局。原因在於弗拉基米爾梅金斯基所表達的立場他是當代俄羅斯精英中最為知名的意識形態者與曆史修正主義者之一。
（圖片來源：X上的BarakRavid）
澤連斯基如今宣稱隻在獲得安全保障的情況下願意談判，但雙方在措辭上的表麵鏡像隻是表象。
四年前，普京以進攻性戰略的含義使用安全這一概念：他要求就烏克蘭不加入歐洲大西洋一體化、將烏克蘭國家永久中立化以及承認俄羅斯的排他性勢力範圍給出保障。因此，在俄方理解中，安全被視為對他國主權的限製。
今天，澤連斯基用相同的措辭表達相反的概念：通過具體的多邊承諾以及可核查的威懾與預防機製，防止對其國家的反複侵略。
（圖：我們在基輔記錄了這些畫麵版權所有，Giorgio Provinciali）
因此，日內瓦僵局並非出自缺乏正式的對話意願，而是源於前提條件的不兼容性。
梅丁斯基所傳達的俄方立場仍基於扭曲的曆史解讀，否認烏克蘭的完整主體性，主張以凍結軍事成果作為談判基礎，強加對烏克蘭戰略選擇的永久否決權，並隱含要求為俄羅斯犯罪獲取國際合法性。
我與Alla Perdei在最近的文章中逐日重述的、對2022年2月24日之前曆史事件的再解讀顯示：經過了又四年的轟炸，烏克蘭無法在沒有結構性保障的情況下接受停火。更廣泛地看，20142022年的經驗也證明：沒有威懾的凍結隻會導致侵略者的重整軍備。
正是這一經驗，使得基輔今天無法接受含糊的表述。
談判在雙方都尋求減少未來不確定性時才會奏效。
而這裏，恰恰相反。
梅丁斯基通過將戰爭描述為曆史糾正的手段而非侵略，體現了俄羅斯國家的話語功能。他談論自然的曆史空間，淡化或重新詮釋蘇聯曆史中最黑暗的篇章，否認烏克蘭的自主性與曆史認同，稱其為人造的衍生物。
這種做法與弗拉基米爾普京在2021年關於俄羅斯人與烏克蘭人曆史統一的文章中所表達的學說一致，該文將烏克蘭呈現為俄羅斯連續體的一部分，而非一個完整的曆史主體。
因此，梅丁斯基並非簡單的談判代表，而是普京可帶到談判桌上、用於曆史性批準而非妥協的最忠實的拉希斯姆（rashism）詮釋者。
（圖：我在與euro news連線直播時的照片圖片來自euro news分享的視頻）
對基輔而言，接受這些條件將等於放棄主權並使未來脆弱性製度化；對莫斯科而言，放棄這些條件則意味著承認最初戰略目標的失敗。
因此，平衡被一種消極的對稱性所阻斷：雙方都將讓步視為生存性威脅。
2022年2月19日，澤連斯基在烏克蘭士兵仍在轟炸下犧牲之際請求打破談判僵局；普京的回應是要求安全保障。
截至2026年2月19日，談判仍然停滯不前，因為俄方的條件等同於為那些炸彈賦予政治合法性，而澤連斯基的回應是要求安全保障。
隻要俄羅斯將談判視為既成事實的批準，而烏克蘭將其視為維護主權的手段，任何談判桌摩納哥、明斯克或日內瓦都將保持結構性不穩定。
這就解釋了為什麽在四年之後，我們麵臨的不僅是外交的失敗，還是以其他方式延續的戰爭。
***
持續的停電嚴重損壞了我們在烏克蘭西部的家中的供暖係統，而我們當時就在頓巴斯。
沒有電，點著的爐火無法通過水泵循環熱水。結果，係統起火，整個房子麵臨著燒毀的風險。幸而未被燒毀，但整個係統需要更換，房子也需要修複。管道都是歪的，牆壁被煙霧熏黑，供暖係統無法正常工作，需要徹底更換。
我們正在盡最大努力，因為Alla的父母住在那裏，但這裏還有許多工作要做，周圍的人處境也好不到哪兒去。
我們正在重啟籌款活動，感謝每一位支持我們修複被俄羅斯摧毀一切的朋友。即使是小額捐款也有幫助。我們會及時更新進展。
感謝大家，朋友們。
????????如果你相信我們的工作，請支持我們????????????
在過去的三年裏，我們一直在烏克蘭戰爭的各個前線進行報道
https://www.paypal.com/pools/c/9mFvpzKUrU
