
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and US Secretary of State Marco Rubio twice met in Malaysia at the Summit of the Associations of Southeast Asia.
The first meeting took place yesterday-these were full-fledged 50-minute negotiations. According to their results, Rubio gave a ten-minute press conference, during which he emphasized that the White House was dissatisfied with the lack of flexibility from Moscow, but said that he discussed with Lavrov a certain “new approach” to the Russian-Ukrainian settlement.
This morning, Lavrov and Rubio talked again. It was a very short conversation between the meetings of the summit; TASS State Agency emphasized that he "went through a positive atmosphere." “Lavrov smiled, Rubio patted him on the shoulder, the interlocutors actively gestured and shook hands at the end,” TASS said in a statement.
Lavrov, who did not communicate with reporters the day before (the Russian Foreign Ministry issued a short formal press release) today gave some comments about the meeting with Rubio. The Russian minister emphasized that during the negotiations, he confirmed the previously set forth position of Moscow. Answering the question about the “new approach”, Lavrov said: “I want to answer the words of Donald Trump:“ So I will tell you ”, adding that“ there are things that are not commented. ”
Russia should compensate Ukraine with 500 billion euros damage caused during a full -scale war, said German Chancellor Frederick Mertz in the fields of the conference on the restoration of Ukraine, which was held in Rome yesterday.
“Russia must compensate for this material damage. Until this happens, she will not receive and should not access frozen assets, ”Merts said. He noted that income from frozen assets will still be directed to the support of Ukraine.
Since the beginning of the war, almost $ 260 billion of Russian assets remain frozen in European depositories. Throughout the first years of the war, there was talk about their possible confiscation, but in the end they refused this option. It was not possible to find legal grounds for confiscation, but the leaders of the European Union did not want to expropriate funds on the basis of a political decision, fearing that this would undermine trust in the euro and the existing financial system.
At the same time, profit from reinvesting frozen assets since the summer of 2024 is transferred to Ukraine. Over the year, Kyiv has already received more than 18 billion euros from the European Union. 90% of these money are directed to defense, the remaining 10% for the restoration of Ukraine.
In a joint report of the Government of Ukraine, the EU, the UN and the World Bank, published in February, they estimated at 176 billion dollars direct damage from the direct destruction by Ukraine by the Russian army from the beginning of a full-scale war in 2022 and until the end of 2024. The alleged expenses for the full restoration of the Ukrainian economy to the pre -war level at the same report were estimated at $ 524 billion.
In March, the deputy head of the office of the President of Ukraine, Irina Mudra, estimated the country's economic losses since the beginning of a full -scale war of $ 589 billion. The total damage since 2014, when the war in the Donbass began, in its assessment, could exceed the trillion dollars.
Anonymous reader (Tbilisi) . I live in Georgia, I have a large circle of communication, among which there are a lot of Russians and Ukrainians who have disagreed with the war, forced to leave their homes because of the war. People are tired of emigration, life with the Byzarans, rental housing, the inability to return home due to criminal prosecutions in the Russian Federation and endless arrivals in Ukraine.
At first, only the words of support and sympathy were heard to Ukraine, but recently I have increasingly hear how those who supported Ukraine begin to change rhetoric, including the Ukrainians themselves. They say: “I used to think, Putin is to blame, he started the war, but now I understand that Zelensky also wants this war. If Zelensky agreed with Putin, there would be no war. ”
Agreed? Who agreed? If the Jews agreed with Hitler? If Stalin agreed with Hitler? If Vietnam agreed with America? If Zelensky agreed with Putin? I understand correctly, if everyone who was attacked, knew how to negotiate, would there be no wars and violence?
Guys, this is called Victimbleming. The aggressor does not want to negotiate, does not hear and does not listen, he comes to take what he wants, he does not need rights, laws and your consent for this.
"Jellyfish"