What are Russia’s true goals in Ukraine, why compromises are not possible on the territorial issue and why peace in Ukraine will not be easy, Latvian Ambassador to Ukraine Andrejs Pildegovićs tells in an interview with LETA.
How do you view the ongoing peace talks between the US and Russia and the US, Russia and Ukraine? Although the US side is usually optimistic, the most important thing is that the issue of territories is unresolved, and it does not look like any compromises are possible.
The positive thing is that these diplomatic talks are very dynamic and intense. The hope is that the representatives of the USA, Ukraine and Russia are meeting in a tripartite format, and the talks are taking place on a very wide range of issues. But, of course, we are very cautious or even skeptical in our predictions regarding Russia’s position. Invasion and aggression are still ongoing, attacks are ongoing, including very brutal and cynical attacks on civilian infrastructure. Latvia, of course, stands for a just, stable and respectful peace, which is based on the UN Charter and the principles of international law. In this context, the territorial integrity of Ukraine is a fundamental principle. The president of Ukraine, Volodymyr Zelenskyi, also speaks about this, and he emphasizes that Ukraine is ready for compromises, but they do not include giving up their territories or voluntarily withdrawing troops from the Donetsk region.
With such radical differences, where Ukraine is not going to give up Donbass, but Russia has announced that this is a prerequisite for peace, hasn’t a situation developed?
It can be called differently, but the territorial issue is the subject of this war. Russia wants to forcefully change Ukraine’s borders and bring Ukraine under its control so that it falls under Moscow’s sphere of influence. Ukraine, of course, opposes it.
How do you view the opinions (various leaked information in mass media) that the White House also defends this Russian demand and could put pressure on Ukraine?
Officially, the White House denies that it is encouraging Ukraine to give up its territories. We are also aware of the US calls on both sides to de-escalate the situation and calls on Russia to refrain from attacks on Ukraine’s energy infrastructure. The US plays a very important role as a mediator, and of course we would like this great power to be more on the side of Ukraine. Our view is that Russia and Ukraine are not equally responsible for this war. Russia is the aggressor, Ukraine is the victim. Moreover, this war is not only about Ukraine. It is about the world order, whether the aggressor was rewarded with territorial gains, whether this war will become a new determinant of the world order. If so, other countries will be able to follow suit.
Moreover, it is no longer just about Donbass. Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov has openly emphasized several times that Moscow will not reconcile if the former “Nazi” regime remains in part of Ukraine. Lavrov also said about the international security guarantees that Russia will agree to them only if Ukraine is not “anti-Russian”, which means that the Kremlin wants to create a puppet regime there.
This is Latvia’s overall analysis and assessment of Russia’s real goals. The Russians continue aggressive military pressure along the entire front, starting with the Sumy region, Kharkiv, Dnipro, Zaporizhia, Kherson, etc. We see that this war for Russia is not only about Donetsk. Zero as was the attack on Zaporizhzhia, in the immediate vicinity of the largest nuclear power plant in Europe, the number of attacks on Odesa has also increased very sharply. In recent weeks, Russian officials have been openly talking about New Russia (Novorassia) and the possibility of conquering the entire Black Sea coast. So currently, the war goals defined by Putin have not been achieved. In any case, it is up to the Ukrainian people to (not) give up the territories, but we see huge risks in it.
In his speech at the Davos Forum, Zelensky very harshly criticized Europe for its insufficient capacity to act against Russia. Are Ukrainians disappointed in Europe? Are Zelensky’s accusations justified?
Zelensky’s speech should be seen in the context of the current circumstances. This winter in Ukraine is the worst in the last ten years, the people of Ukraine have been living in arctic winter conditions for the last month, when the temperature drops below minus 20 at night, and Russia has destroyed all the cogeneration plants. Zelensky is clearly aware that Europe is Ukraine’s closest ally, and the speech in Davos was a desperate cry for support amid the current energy crisis and for even greater European resolve. This applies to both air defense support and financial assistance. The European loan to Ukraine in the amount of EUR 90 billion came just in time, but of course it is not enough. These are also issues related to the reconstruction of Ukraine and the enlargement of the European Union. As you know, Hungary is blocking the opening of these negotiations. Zelensky understands that this is a decisive year for Ukraine. A certain amount of Euroscepticism is emerging in society, which matches the Kremlin’s narratives. Unfortunately, there are also some opinion leaders appearing in Ukraine who try to tell that Ukraine is no longer needed by anyone, and that it is not a part of Europe at all, maybe Ukraine should take a third path, which is dangerous in the opinion of Latvia. But the absolute majority of the Ukrainian people want to see Ukraine on the political map of Europe, and from the point of view of Latvia’s interests, it is important for Ukraine to be in both the European Union and NATO.
At the same time, the numbers are dispassionate. Without denying Europe’s huge financial support, it is still less in absolute terms than the amount Europe pays Russia for natural gas.
This topic is regularly brought up by the Nordic and Baltic countries in the Council of Europe. Our countries’ encouragement to other European partners is to increase military and economic support for Ukraine. Unfortunately, the support of the European Union countries for Ukraine is not uniform. Both Baltics and Scandinavians want to create positive influence with their experience. We also encourage other countries not to get tired and not to turn away from Ukraine.
What kind of support does Zelensky have in Ukraine itself? Let’s remember the protests against corruption last July. Assuming a hypothetical situation that free and fair elections can be held in Ukraine, would Zelenskiy have majority support?
As an ambassador residing in Ukraine, I should not be involved in political tote trading. But the Ukrainian state is functioning, its president, parliament and government are capable of action. The official ratings of the president hover around 60%. In the last week, the president has also resolved internal political entanglements, new ministers have been appointed, and the adoption of the 2026 budget has been achieved. The mood of the public is fluctuating, and it will certainly be affected by the current energy crisis. Zelensky has publicly admitted that he is preparing for elections. A special working group has been established in the Rada, which is preparing amendments to the law that would allow elections to be organized this year. It is an open question whether these elections, which could technically take place in the second half of the year, will be only presidential elections and a referendum on the peace treaty, or whether there will also be elections of another level. Neither presidential, nor parliamentary, nor municipal elections have been held since 2019. There is public demand for elections, but they can only take place if there is a ceasefire. There is also the practical issue of the ability of Ukrainians living abroad to cast their vote. The current law provides that this can only be done in the diplomatic missions of each country. Considering the large number of refugees, technically not all eligible Ukrainians can make their wishes in one consulate in one day.
Russian propaganda keeps telling us that Ukrainian soldiers are deserting en masse and there are problems with mobilization. Is there any grain of truth in that?
It would be correct to ask representatives of Ukraine to comment on these issues. I do not have complete information. However, of course, the war for four years causes enormous stress in the society, and the consequences of the war in the Ukrainian society are very severe and felt. I have a feeling, polls also show it, that the majority of the public is ready to accept the freezing of the front line in the Donetsk region, but is not ready to give up its territories. The Ukrainian army is approximately 900,000 strong and holds the front line, and there are no signs of any dramatic change in front line configurations. But of course the price is huge. The President of Ukraine has also indicated that additional mobilization may be necessary. It is a very complex and painful subject. It is one of the most important points in the peace talks, so that, along with international guarantees, there should be the preservation of the Ukrainian army in the amount of at least 800,000 soldiers. Because in the long term, the Russian threat will not disappear.
Quite a few people in Latvia were deeply disturbed by the announcement of the new head of the administration of the President of Ukraine, Kirilo Budanova, who before that was the head of the Central Intelligence Agency, that Russia was preparing to invade the Baltic states. How should we look at it?
We need not panic. However, it is clear that we live next to an aggressive and distrustful neighbor that continues to militarize and question the inviolability of national borders. We all know about the Russian drone attacks on various European countries, including the damaged cables in the Baltic Sea. Therefore, Budanov’s words should be taken seriously in order to be ready for crisis situations. At the same time, these threats should not be perceived as inevitable and unavoidable. Of course, Budanov also aimed these goals at European leaders in order to convey the message that in the event of Ukraine’s defeat, Russia’s threat to Europe will increase. Living on the border of Russia, we must be vigilant and the whole society must think about security.
Concluding the conversation, the question of Ukraine’s future after the war. Opinions are often heard that when the refugees return home, there will inevitably be friction between those who did not leave Ukraine during the war and lived, so to speak, under the bombs, and those who “wintered” in safe places. Do you see this as a problem?
Absolutely. There is quite a lot of talk that peace will be psychologically just as hard as the conditions of war. One of the problems will be the mentioned return of the refugees, and another equally big problem will be the integration of veterans into society and peacetime life. There are already one and a half million veterans who may have PTSD. Consequently, after the war, there will be a huge number of people who will need physical and psychological rehabilitation. Another issue is related to the illicit circulation of wartime weapons during peacetime. It will be very important to support Ukrainian children whose childhood has passed under war conditions. Therefore, peace will not be easy.
Published: 09.02.2026 01:13
Ruta Kesner, LETA
date:2026-02-10 10:24:00
Keep reading