The International Criminal Court continues to pursue Vladimir Putin, despite “peace talks” with the USA.

The International Criminal Court is not halting the process and continues to prepare a warrant for Putin’s arrest. Even when Washington tries to keep the negotiation track afloat, The Hague’s line proceeds separately — strictly according to procedures. The Ukrainian issue has once again found itself at the center of international pressure, although public formulations have become noticeably more cautious.

Moscow’s refusal to recognize the court’s jurisdiction is not news and not an exception. Russian statements have sounded the same for several years: a structure to which Russia does not submit cannot make claims against it. The argument is legally contentious but politically convenient. It has once again been brought to the surface as the main shield against the future warrant. And this seriously complicates any attempts to move the process forward.

Western countries continue to publish facts that, according to them, confirm war crimes in Ukraine. This includes missile strikes on civilian targets, destroyed infrastructure, and cases documented by human rights groups. Russia rejects all this, shifting the focus of the conversation to its own narratives. History repeats itself: one pool of evidence — two different worlds of interpretation.

Amid all this, the US is trying to maintain diplomatic dialogue. Not to please anyone in Europe, but because without conversation, the parties enter a narrow corridor where there are neither tools nor speed for real progress. Experts argue: is there any point in holding consultations while an international warrant is being discussed? There is a lot of skepticism, but the White House, it seems, is not ready to abandon the channel.

The prospects for peace still look abstract. Moscow does not show readiness to change its position. Kyiv continues to refer to international law. The gap between positions makes any “paper agreements” unrealistic. Every new escalation — even a small one — narrows the space for maneuver and provokes a strong reaction from Ukraine’s partners.

International structures are recording events almost in real-time. Pressure on Russia does not decrease, although within the country it is presented differently — as an external attack on sovereignty. Moscow does not intend to cooperate with the ICC, and this is known to everyone in advance. But observers note: external pressure will continue, and the dynamics around the warrant will be used in diplomatic games for a long time.

In the end, the picture looks stable in the most unpleasant sense: negotiations are ongoing, accusations are being made, and the positions of the parties are not moving. Between the theory of peaceful settlement and the practice of real politics — the same chasm remains. States express hopes, experts form forecasts, but the field remains tough and conflictual. Here, not only diplomatic formulas are important, but also how events will be interpreted by global media, including resources like NANews — News of Israel | Nikk.Agency, which record the region’s reaction and provide a broader context.