Українською читайте тут.
During the “Security Architecture” forum, the head of the Presidential Office named ending hostilities and security guarantees as the main priority for Ukraine and an indispensable condition for any settlement.
On June 1, 2026, the “Security Architecture” forum took place in Kyiv. During a panel discussion, the head of the Presidential Office and former chief of the Main Intelligence Directorate (HUR), Kyrylo Budanov, spoke about the state of the negotiation process, internal pressure on Russia, the nature of modern warfare, and the future of security alliances.
Budanov acknowledged that a certain pause in the negotiation process exists—but only at the highest level. According to him, technical contacts have never ceased.
“There is indeed a certain pause in negotiations at the highest level. As for technical discussions, these negotiations have never stopped,” he said.
Moreover, while speaking with journalists, Budanov added that a U.S. delegation would soon visit Kyiv and Moscow.
The head of the Presidential Office rejected the view that negotiations had reached a dead end:
“As for the claim that negotiations are currently [stalled], I do not share that position. The effectiveness of the [process] depends on all participants—both our position and the Russian position.”
Kyrylo Budanov also commented on the matter cautiously, though not without optimism:
“As for whether Russia wants peace—I don’t know; I think it does not want it very much. But if we ask whether it will be ready for certain actions in the near future, I think that some semi-promising prospects have now emerged,” he said.
Responding to a question about the advisability of European contacts with Moscow, Budanov outlined a condition: first, formulate a position, then hold a conversation.
“There is a rather unpleasant situation in which certain representatives of Europe tried to do something similar and heard a very simple response: ‘What have you come to us with—what is your position?’ And there was no answer to that question. Therefore, there is no need to repeat it.”
In his opinion, Western involvement is inevitable—and necessary not only for Russia:
“We need the involvement of our Western partners no less than the Russians do, in fact. The Russians are seeking a significant deal from our Western partners. There are many issues there that concern not Ukraine, but them.”
Budanov named ending hostilities as the main priority—and security guarantees as an indispensable condition of any settlement: “Without security guarantees, there will, in principle, be no future.”
Budanov rejected a simplistic view of Russia’s internal situation. He described the country’s economic difficulties as a recession, but not a catastrophe. However, in his opinion, the real pressure on the Kremlin comes from something else.
“A serious argument is the change in public sentiment. The fact that something is going wrong if the war has come to Russia’s territory,” he noted.
In particular, Budanov believes that strikes on Russian territory have caused these shifts in public sentiment: “People definitely see it and definitely feel it.”
He also cautioned against portraying the Russian leadership as a caricature:
“It is convenient for all of us to say that they are somehow insane people. That is not always the case. There are quite serious and intelligent people there who know how to analyze everything that is happening. And they clearly see the outlook—everywhere there is regression and decline.”
In Budanov’s view, it is precisely the threat to systemic stability that is the Kremlin’s main incentive to seek a way out:
“This is already a threat to the stability of the system. That is what they fear. Everything else—economic downturns and so on—they will survive.”
Budanov also ruled out a scenario in which Putin voluntarily leaves power, though he noted that the Kremlin leader “is worried about his life.”
At the same time, the head of the Presidential Office added that Russia’s leadership would seek to preserve the system.
“I do not believe that he (Putin—Detector Media) will simply leave. After 27 years, having built a stable system, to simply walk away—and for what purpose?.. He will do everything to contain the situation. And that is precisely why it gives us some hope that we will be able to achieve a result,” he said.
At the same time, Budanov added, “the best solution for everyone is to remove this problem. And [they] know this perfectly well—which means they need to negotiate.”
Budanov characterized the current line of contact as a qualitatively new phenomenon in military history: a completely transparent front where no movement can be concealed.
“This is not a war of mobility; it is not a war where one side can gain territory.”
He noted that this experience would become a subject of study for the entire world:
“This is something that, after the end of this war, everyone in the world will study and work through. Everyone will have to find solutions for how to operate with the so-called ‘transparent front’ (when everyone sees everything. — Ed.).”
Budanov spoke most sharply about the future of security structures. He emphasized that a return to the pre-war architecture is impossible.
He described the principle of consensus in alliances as a structural flaw:
“An alliance cannot be a serious one if decisions must be adopted unanimously by many countries at the same time. That simply does not work. Everyone will always be at different points. And at a critical moment, they will never find themselves at the same point.”
To countries that have not yet realized the new reality, Budanov issued a direct warning: “Other countries need, first and foremost, to grow up. They need to start looking at the world realistically.”
In his view, a new architecture must be built without illusions—otherwise it will become an artificial construct.
“We may simply create a false structure—we will believe that everything will work, and then, when it comes to a real test, it will turn out that there is no one who can make a decision,” Kyrylo Budanov believes.
Photo: Nataliia Lygachova
