Izvestia: Russia ready to host Israel-Palestine talks, EU unable to find common ground

The escalation of fighting between Israel and Palestine has been ongoing for more than a week, and international mediators have not gone beyond calling for a ceasefire. Russia’s First Deputy Permanent Representative to the UN Dmitry Polyansky said in an interview with Izvestia that now all parties "are trying to use the influence that they have on Israelis and Palestinians." In this conflict, Russia, which supports joint efforts, is counting on the Middle East Quartet. The European Union announced its intention to work towards a settlement within the framework of this mechanism on May 18. Meanwhile, despite the statements by Brussels, the EU member-states have not yet found a common stance, confirmed by the fact that not even all members of the alliance have backed the call for a ceasefire, the newspaper writes.

Russia is ready to host direct talks between Israel and Palestine, Polyansky said in an interview with Izvestia. "Over the past few years we have been consistently calling for holding this summit and our position remains unchanged. We will be very glad to see Palestinians and Israelis in Moscow. We have rather good relations with both of them. And of course, we are making every effort to ensure that these talks are successful," the diplomat said.

Dutch politician and Member of the European Parliament (MEP) Bert-Jan Ruissen, who is also vice chair of the EP’s delegation for relations with Israel, told Izvestia that it was time for the EU to act more responsibly in this conflict and stop providing support for Palestine. The politician explained that although Hamas was branded as a terror group by the EU, there was no consensus on the Middle East conflict among EU members. While Belgium, Ireland, Luxemburg and Sweden criticize Israel, most of the other EU countries support the Jewish state.

 

Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Biden opts for ‘alternative Syria’

A delegation of the US State Department visited northeastern Syrian territories, which are not controlled by the government. This is the first visit of its kind since Joe Biden took office, Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes. The US leader is trying not to repeat the mistakes of his predecessor, voicing support for local forces on which the US has relied for a long time during the anti-terror campaign against the Islamic State (IS, terror group outlawed in Russia). Meanwhile, experts speculate how this new ‘Iranian’ policy of Washington might affect key aspects of the US strategy in Syria.

Until now, the Biden administration has not published any detailed strategy on Syria. This contrasts with its clear wish to iron out the crisis around Iran. There were doubts that Washington would leave even a limited military contingent in the northeastern Arab Republic given its clear line towards downgrading the priority of some Middle Eastern issues. The visit of the State Department’s delegation demonstrates that Washington is still interested in searching for a political solution for Syria and sees the need to keep providing humanitarian assistance to those Syrian groups who are in need.

The US is maintaining close contacts on Syria with Russia despite their serious disagreements. Russian Defense Minister Sergey Shoigu confirmed this in his March interview with Kazakhstan’s Tengrinews. Shoigu also described the first steps by the Biden administration as promising.

Anton Mardasov, a researcher at the Washington-based Middle East Institute (MEI) and expert at the Russian International Affairs Council, notes that the representatives of the State Department and the Pentagon regularly visit the territories controlled by the Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF), pointing out that this practice was established during the Trump presidency. The Biden administration is acting in the framework of expected tactics: it keeps supporting the "alternative Syria" to combat the IS group and exert pressure on Iran, Damascus and Turkey. Meanwhile, it tries to vow support for the SDF leadership in order to avoid Trump’s mistakes. On the other hand, it’s unclear now how the intensified US diplomatic efforts towards Iran could affect US policy in Syria.

 

Kommersant: Ukraine draws up its own Minsk agreements

Ukraine has submitted to the Normandy Four (Russia, France, Germany and Ukraine) a new draft of the so-called clusters for drawing up a roadmap to settle the conflict in Donbass. They highlight significant differences with Russia’s stance, sources close to the negotiations told Kommersant. It's of major importance that the Ukrainian proposals are the first document, in which Kiev showed how it seeks to change the Minsk agreements. Meanwhile, Moscow and the other parties to the Normandy group insist that the agreement must be kept intact.

The initiative to divide the Minsk agreements into certain elements called clusters, and then to try to agree on each of them in particular was put forward by Paris and Berlin. The major difference with Moscow is the demand that full control over the border with Russia, which Kiev has not been controlling since 2014 due to the conflict, must be established before local elections in Donbass, and not after. Kiev also holds a tough position on constitutional reform, which should confirm decentralization, refusing to coordinate it with Donetsk and Lugansk.

According to Kommersant, the discussion on the new clusters could be held this month. The next video conference of the Normandy Four negotiators is scheduled for May 26.

Ukrainian political scientist Vladimir Fesenko, who heads the Kiev-based Penta Center for Applied Political Studies, notes that the number of disagreements gives no grounds for being upbeat on solving the conflict. According to him, the best option for Donbass could be the Transnistrian scenario, when "there is no war, but there is no full settlement." A frozen conflict is the most realistic scenario, he stressed.

 

Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Moldovan diaspora in Russia waits for Putin’s signal

Moldovan President Maia Sandu is due to arrive in Germany for an official visit on Wednesday and is expected to meet with representatives of the Moldovan diaspora. Moldova will hold early parliamentary elections on July 11, which could be crucial for the country’s geopolitical choice. Many experts predict the end of a pro-Russian period in Moldova’s history and the republic’s shift to the EU and the US.

Leader of the Social and Democratic Party Viktor Shelin told Nezavisimaya Gazeta that the pro-presidential Party of Action and Solidarity (PAS) could secure the majority of seats in parliament if the pro-Russian and pro-Moldovan citizens do not turn out at the polling stations. The country's policy line would then be pro-EU and pro-US.

Meanwhile, a significant number of Moldovan citizens sympathize with Vladimir Putin, and the Russian leader remains the number one politician in the republic, the expert notes. "This part of the society will vote for the third force, at which Moscow will point. And the Moldovan diaspora in Russia will vote. However, no such force is seen so far."

The Ukrainian expert recalls that Sandu won the 2020 presidential elections thanks to the support of the Moldovan diaspora in the West. Its representatives were very active while very few voted in Russia. There are still three weeks left before the election campaign kicks off and political parties could be reshaped. If Moscow sends a message signaling support for new political parties, pro-Russian and pro-government forces will vote en masse in Moldova. If that does not happen, then Sandu and her party will achieve victory.

Moldova’s Ambassador to Moscow Vladimir Golvatyuk has called on the Russian authorities to help hold the Moldovan elections in Russia.

 

Vedomosti: Russia cuts investment in US bonds to historic low

Russia continues to reduce its holding of US government securities, according to the US Treasury Department. If in February the Bank of Russia owned US treasuries to the tune of $5.756 bln, in March this figure plunged to $3.976 bln. Meanwhile, the share of long-term securities tripled (from $306 mln to $1.08 bln) and the volume of short-term bonds decreased from $5.4 bln to $2.88 bln, Vedomosti writes.

"Russia’s decision to sell US government securities was initially purely political but since the standoff between the two countries’ economies has lasted for more than a year, now economic arguments have been added to the political ones," chief analyst at Alor Broker Alexei Antonov notes. The Federal Reserve’s nearly zero key rate and its active efforts to boost the economy by cash at the peak of the pandemic will highly likely lead to a sharp rise in inflation, forcing the Federal Reserve to raise the interest rate and this means that the price of US government securities will fall. So, the decision to sell these securities is quite justified.

Head of the Center for Investment Analysis and Macroeconomic Research at the Center for Strategic Research Daniil Nametkin also believes that the shrinking volume of investment in US securities is explained by expectations that the Federal Reserve’s monetary policy will remain "too soft."

"The US Federal Reserve’s representatives have stated many times that they believed it advisable to keep the federal funds rate at the level of near zero until the national economy shows stable growth rates," he pointed out. "Meanwhile, the US regulator plans to keep operations on open markets. In these conditions, the real revenues from investment in US government securities remain negative for investors given the mounting pro-inflation risks." Given the current trends, funds could flow into the securities of those countries that offer more attractive revenues along with reasonable risks, for example, China, he noted.

TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews