An unexpected chill has emerged in the diplomatic relations between Washington and Kyiv. U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio sharply rejected the statements of the President of Ukraine and clarified the situation. Zamin.uz presents the details of these high-profile statements made under the skies of Paris.
The head of the U.S. State Department, Marco Rubio, in a conversation with journalists at Le Bourget Airport in France, accused Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky of distorting the truth. The discussion concerns the security guarantees expected to be provided to Ukraine and the fate of the Donbas region.
“This is simply a lie”: Rubio’s sharp rebuttal
According to the Secretary of State, the American side did not promise Kyiv security guarantees in exchange for withdrawing troops from Donbas.
“This does not correspond to reality at all. Zelensky himself knows that these statements are false. What was actually told to him is that security guarantees will only come into force after the war is completely over. But we have never linked this to the condition of giving up territories,” said Marco Rubio.
Washington — just a mediator?
Rubio clearly explained the role of the United States: Washington merely acted as a messenger, conveying Russia’s demands to Ukraine.
- The decision is Kyiv’s: America is not forcing Ukraine into territorial concessions.
- Consequence: if Ukraine does not agree to concessions, the fighting will continue. Likewise, if Russia does not reach a compromise, the war will not stop.
For reference, since the autumn of 2025, the Russian side has been demanding the complete withdrawal of Ukrainian troops from Donbas to end the war. Currently, about 15–17 percent of this region remains under Kyiv’s control.
Deadline until June and the Middle East factor
Earlier, Zelensky stated that the United States is pressuring to end the war by June this year due to the congressional elections scheduled for November 2026. However, the situation may now become even more complicated.
Journalists asked Rubio about the possibility that weapons intended for Ukraine (within the framework of the PURL program) could be redirected to the Middle East — to the front where the war against Iran is ongoing.
America’s interests come first: Rubio emphasized that for now the direction of weapons has not changed, but this possibility cannot be ruled out. If the weapons are needed by the United States itself, Washington will use them first for its own needs.
Dear readers, in your opinion, are security guarantees more important for Ukraine than territorial integrity? How much could the redirection of U.S. weapons to the Middle East change the situation on the Ukrainian front?
Read “Zamin” on Telegram!
