// Global Analysis Archive
According to the source, US-led Geneva negotiations in February 2026 have stalled, reflecting long-standing incompatibilities over territory, sovereignty, and security alignment. Past mediation efforts show limited success on transactional measures (e.g., grain corridors, prisoner exchanges) but repeated failure to secure a comprehensive settlement.
Russia and Ukraine are set to hold US-brokered trilateral talks in Geneva on February 17–18, 2026, following earlier rounds in Abu Dhabi focused on buffer zones and ceasefire monitoring. The source indicates territorial demands in Donetsk and Ukraine’s pursuit of Western security guarantees remain the central obstacles amid continued infrastructure strikes and active diplomacy at the Munich Security Conference.
Putin’s overnight meeting with Trump’s envoys highlights renewed US-Russia engagement on a Ukraine settlement, with Moscow insisting territorial issues must be resolved to secure peace. Zelensky’s criticism of Europe’s fragmented response underscores a growing risk that Western cohesion weakens, increasing Russia’s leverage at the negotiating table.
The source describes a growing recruitment ecosystem drawing Southeast Asian nationals toward the Russia–Ukraine conflict through both voluntary enlistment for pay and apparent deception via online job offers. Divergent national responses highlight gaps in interdiction, victim identification, and the diplomatic capacity needed once individuals cross borders.
The source assesses that North Korea is unlikely to renew cooperation at the Kaesong Industrial Complex despite renewed interest in Seoul, citing Pyongyang’s shift toward treating inter-Korean ties as hostile state-to-state relations. Asset absorption at Kaesong, information-control concerns, leverage asymmetry, and improved economic alternatives via Russia further reduce incentives for reopening.
According to the source, China’s long-standing critical narrative toward NATO does not translate into a strategic preference for NATO’s collapse. The document argues NATO helps deter wider European escalation, limits unified Western pressure on China, and reduces the likelihood Beijing would be forced into high-stakes crisis management to restrain Russia.
According to the source, US-led Geneva negotiations in February 2026 have stalled, reflecting long-standing incompatibilities over territory, sovereignty, and security alignment. Past mediation efforts show limited success on transactional measures (e.g., grain corridors, prisoner exchanges) but repeated failure to secure a comprehensive settlement.
Russia and Ukraine are set to hold US-brokered trilateral talks in Geneva on February 17–18, 2026, following earlier rounds in Abu Dhabi focused on buffer zones and ceasefire monitoring. The source indicates territorial demands in Donetsk and Ukraine’s pursuit of Western security guarantees remain the central obstacles amid continued infrastructure strikes and active diplomacy at the Munich Security Conference.
Putin’s overnight meeting with Trump’s envoys highlights renewed US-Russia engagement on a Ukraine settlement, with Moscow insisting territorial issues must be resolved to secure peace. Zelensky’s criticism of Europe’s fragmented response underscores a growing risk that Western cohesion weakens, increasing Russia’s leverage at the negotiating table.
The source describes a growing recruitment ecosystem drawing Southeast Asian nationals toward the Russia–Ukraine conflict through both voluntary enlistment for pay and apparent deception via online job offers. Divergent national responses highlight gaps in interdiction, victim identification, and the diplomatic capacity needed once individuals cross borders.
The source assesses that North Korea is unlikely to renew cooperation at the Kaesong Industrial Complex despite renewed interest in Seoul, citing Pyongyang’s shift toward treating inter-Korean ties as hostile state-to-state relations. Asset absorption at Kaesong, information-control concerns, leverage asymmetry, and improved economic alternatives via Russia further reduce incentives for reopening.
According to the source, China’s long-standing critical narrative toward NATO does not translate into a strategic preference for NATO’s collapse. The document argues NATO helps deter wider European escalation, limits unified Western pressure on China, and reduces the likelihood Beijing would be forced into high-stakes crisis management to restrain Russia.
| ID | Title | Category | Date | Views | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| RPT-1328 | Geneva Talks Reopen a Crowded Mediation Track, but Territory Remains the Core Impasse | Russia-Ukraine War | 2026-02-18 | 0 | ACCESS » |
| RPT-1117 | Geneva Trilateral Talks Signal Push for Ceasefire Mechanics as Donbas Dispute Hardens | Russia-Ukraine War | 2026-02-13 | 0 | ACCESS » |
| RPT-75 | Midnight Diplomacy: Putin Signals Peace Talks, But Territory Remains the Dealbreaker | Russia-Ukraine War | 2026-01-23 | 3 | ACCESS » |
| RPT-951 | Southeast Asia’s Emerging Recruitment Pipeline Into the Russia–Ukraine War | Southeast Asia | 2025-08-05 | 0 | ACCESS » |
| RPT-1186 | Kaesong’s Revival Faces Structural Headwinds as Pyongyang Prioritizes Separation and Russia-Linked Gains | North Korea | 2024-11-14 | 0 | ACCESS » |
| RPT-150 | Why NATO’s Survival May Quietly Serve Beijing’s Core Interests | NATO | 2022-12-28 | 1 | ACCESS » |