MOSCOW, February 27. /TASS/. The United States and Ukraine discussed their positions in Geneva ahead of trilateral talks with Russia; the United States and Iran resumed indirect talks in Geneva; and Iceland plans to hold a referendum on European Union membership. These stories topped Friday’s newspaper headlines across Russia.
Izvestia: US and Ukraine discuss positions in Geneva ahead of trilateral talks with Russia
In Geneva, representatives of Kiev and Washington held face-to-face discussions on Ukraine’s future reconstruction before a trilateral dialogue with Moscow. Overall, such a bilateral format is standard practice, particularly given the United States’ mediating role, Ambassador-at-Large of the Russian Foreign Ministry for Crimes of the Kiev Regime Rodion Miroshnik told Izvestia. At the same time, Ukraine continues to make public statements that are unacceptable for a settlement, and this should be taken into account, he added. Experts noted that the peace dialogue remains at a technical level for now due to the parties’ unwillingness to take political steps. The primary stumbling blocks remain the status of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant and the territorial issue.
Despite the limited amount of publicly available details, there is no hidden agenda behind these negotiations, and Russia likely has little to fear. Such bilateral meetings are standard practice, particularly considering that the United States is acting as a mediator in the peace process, Miroshnik emphasized.
"At present, the United States, while keeping Ukraine within the framework of the negotiations, is conducting its own consultations. How effective they are will be shown by subsequent actions and by whether the talks ultimately yield tangible results," he told the newspaper.
The negotiations are proceeding at a technical level because the parties are not yet prepared to take political steps, military expert Andrey Klintsevich told Izvestia. However, all sides understand that sooner or later a resolution to the conflict will be reached and that the line of contact will eventually stabilize somewhere.
"There is a purely technical component that requires time: how people will cross — by car or on foot — whether passport stamps will be applied, how the work of border guards will be organized, border delimitation, and so on. These issues can indeed be discussed in advance and brought to full readiness, after which one can await a political decision," the expert noted.
The political issues — under what conditions troops would be withdrawn, from which areas, and whether there will be joint or alternative operation of the Zaporozhye Nuclear Power Plant — constitute the key disagreements that require further discussion, Klintsevich added.
Izvestia: Iran seeks to lure US with oil investments as Washington sets new deal deadline
The United States and Iran have returned to indirect negotiations in Geneva in an effort to reduce the risk of renewed escalation following weeks of mutual threats and demonstrations of force. The growing concentration of US troops in the region and sharp statements from the White House have heightened tensions, Izvestia writes. Various scenarios for possible pressure on Iran are being discussed in the White House, including the option under which Israel could deliver the first strike. As Washington imposes a strict two-week deadline on Tehran to accept a new deal, the Iranian side is attempting to seize the initiative by proposing large-scale investments in the oil and gas sector and the purchase of civilian aircraft. Beginning next week, technical consultations between the delegations of the two countries will begin in Vienna.
On February 26, Washington and Tehran held another round of indirect talks in Geneva, hoping to mitigate the risk of further military escalation in the Middle East. Within the framework of the dialogue, Tehran, according to sources cited by Al Jazeera, proposed a temporary freeze on uranium enrichment. This step is being considered as a possible basis for an interim compromise. At the same time, the US side is insisting on the strictest possible terms for any potential agreement.
The Iranian side is prepared to negotiate, but exclusively within the framework of the nuclear agenda, international relations expert Hadi Issa Dalloul told Izvestia. Any attempts to broaden the format to include, for example, Iran’s missile program or its regional influence would make reaching an agreement unlikely, he noted. The expert emphasized that the initiative currently lies with the United States, while for Tehran the principal priority is not sanctions relief but firm guarantees that Washington will not withdraw from the agreement unilaterally.
For the United States, the current round of negotiations is primarily an attempt to exhaust diplomatic avenues before a potential use of force, according to Roman Yanushevsky, Editor-in-Chief of the website of Israel’s Channel 9. "It is important for the White House to show that everything possible has been done for a peaceful settlement. This will lend additional legitimacy to any further steps," he told Izvestia.
According to the expert, the likelihood of fundamental concessions from Tehran is low — most likely, the Iranian leadership will seek to prolong the negotiations and buy time. For the United States, a trade deal with Iran would be advantageous as a means of reducing tensions without resorting to a military scenario and securing a diplomatic outcome, Yanushevsky believes.
Nezavisimaya Gazeta: Iceland may soon join European Union after referendum
The list of candidates for accession to the European Union may soon be expanded to include Iceland. The country’s Prime Minister, Kristrun Frostadottir, has announced that a referendum will be held this year in which Icelanders will express their views on European integration. The government is being prompted to hold the vote by geopolitical shifts and US policy, Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes. Should the Icelandic people conclude that EU membership is necessary to counter potential threats, Iceland would become the frontrunner among states that have long been negotiating accession to the European Union.
If the referendum results in support for European integration, Iceland is likely to emerge as the leading candidate among EU candidate countries. At present, there are nine such candidates: Albania, Georgia, Turkey, North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, Moldova, Ukraine, as well as Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Iceland ranks among the top ten European countries in terms of GDP per capita, possesses a stable economy, and raises no concerns for the EU regarding its political system or its record on human rights. Therefore, Reykjavik is unlikely to encounter significant difficulties in completing the required accession procedures, the newspaper writes. The country is already part of the EU’s single market, the Schengen Area, and the European Free Trade Association. It is far more probable that obstacles to EU membership will arise at the referendum stage itself. A Gallup poll conducted in February 2026 showed that around 42% of respondents support joining the bloc, while roughly the same proportion oppose it.
Alexander Tevdoy-Burmuli, Associate Professor at the Department of Integration Processes at MGIMO University, told Nezavisimaya Gazeta that there are no fundamental disagreements between Reykjavik and Brussels. "The main issue that will be discussed is fisheries. If Iceland joins the European Union, it will adopt the EU’s Common Fisheries Policy. This policy is quite complex in its structure and could entail certain restrictions for Iceland. The country would lose part of its sovereignty over its waters. This could be problematic for a segment of Icelandic society," the expert explained.
Iceland will also be compelled to define its positions on numerous foreign policy issues that have previously held little relevance for it, the expert added. "Either it will begin to block such issues, which would create some tension in relations with other EU members, or it will align itself with broader European policy. That, too, may run counter to the interests of Icelanders," he explained.
Nezavisimaya Gazeta: US emigration exceeds immigration while border closure deepens social divisions
For the first time in 90 years, the number of people emigrating from the United States has exceeded the number entering the country. This was reported by The Wall Street Journal, citing data from one of the leading analytical centers. The newspaper’s journalists — whose editorial stance is generally oppositional to the White House — chose to warn Americans that their country and nation are losing a key pillar of identity and no longer attracting foreigners from around the world the day after President Donald Trump addressed Congress. In his speech, the US president specifically took credit for having closed America’s borders. The migration issue is becoming one of the factors dividing US society, Nezavisimaya Gazeta writes.
Citing data from the Brookings Institution, The Wall Street Journal asserted that last year the United States recorded a net population outflow (that is, the difference between departures and arrivals) of 150,000 people. This year, the newspaper believes, the figure could be even higher, as Trump intends to continue his current policy, including regarding immigrants.
Unlike their opponents in the Democratic Party, Trump’s supporters are not alarmed by such statistics; on the contrary, they welcome them. The trend is entirely consistent not only with the president’s statements but also with policy documents he has endorsed. The National Security Strategy released in December 2025 clearly states that not only illegal immigration but immigration as such is considered undesirable.
In essence, Trump conveyed this message — albeit in somewhat veiled form — in his address. Vladimir Vasilyev, Chief Research Fellow at the Institute for US and Canadian Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, believes that in his speech the American president appealed to "one of the two Americas," one of the two parts into which contemporary US society is mentally divided. "In his speech, Trump described the situation in another America, where everything is wonderful, where affluent, generally white, people with good incomes live. This is the America of the rich and successful, of winners. As for the America of the poor, judging by his speech, it does not exist for Trump. He is not seeking any form of social peace or reconciliation with it," the expert told Nezavisimaya Gazeta.
Rossiyskaya Gazeta: Analysts warn of gradual ruble decline below 80 per dollar amid policy shifts
The Russian currency moved through February with notable stability and continues to trade below 80 rubles per dollar. At the same time, analysts surveyed by Rossiyskaya Gazeta do not rule out the possibility that a gradual weakening of the ruble could begin in March. Moreover, one of the principal reasons may be not so much seasonality or geopolitics as the Finance Ministry’s plans to adjust the current budget rule. Much of the ruble’s short-and long-term reaction will depend on the specific parameters of this adjustment.
The ruble has maintained strong positions thanks to relatively favorable geopolitical conditions, foreign currency sales by the Bank of Russia conducted as part of both regular and irregular operations, and high interest rates that restrain capital outflows from the country, Natalia Vashchelyuk, Senior Analyst at Pervaya Asset Management Company, told the newspaper.
"High discounts on Russian oil partially offset the increase in global oil prices, thereby minimizing the impact of this factor on the ruble. Pressure on the national currency will also stem from further easing of the Bank of Russia’s monetary policy. In March, there is a high probability of another reduction in the key rate to 15%, which will lower the yield on ruble-denominated investments. Taken together, this could lead to a gradual weakening of the ruble to 80-85 rubles per dollar," Head of the Analytical Department at Zenit Bank Vladimir Evstifeev believes.
The ruble’s exchange rate will also continue to depend on geopolitical developments, Vashchelyuk added. "If diplomatic efforts to resolve the military conflict continue, the ruble’s positions will remain strong (baseline scenario). If progress toward a peaceful settlement becomes more substantial, additional strengthening of the ruble cannot be ruled out (optimistic scenario). However, if peace negotiations collapse, the ruble may weaken (risk scenario)," she said.
If the oil price cutoff is reduced to $50 per barrel, the ruble’s exchange rate could stand at around 85 rubles per dollar closer to the end of the year, Mikhail Vasilyev, Chief Analyst at Sovcombank, believes. At the same time, the anticipated changes to the budget rule are unlikely to affect the currency market before April, he added.
TASS is not responsible for the material quoted in these press reviews