Boris Johnson, the former UK Prime Minister, has expressed concern that German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s recent conversation with Russian President Vladimir Putin may signal a return to the so-called Normandy Format – a diplomatic framework aimed at resolving the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, which Johnson referred to as “dreadful.” He argued that such a step could effectively equate Russia and Ukraine as equal negotiating parties in what is, in fact, an international issue.
Johnson highlighted the discussion on X (formerly Twitter), voicing alignment with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, who has openly criticised any potential return to the Normandy Format. This format, previously involving Germany and France as mediators between Russia and Ukraine, was established to facilitate peace in eastern Ukraine. However, it has been widely criticised by Kyiv and international observers as fundamentally flawed due to Russia’s direct role as the aggressor in the conflict.
Johnson’s Remarks on Zelensky’s Position
Johnson echoed Zelensky’s position, emphasising that the Normandy Format was detrimental by treating the Russian-Ukrainian conflict as an internal dispute between two equal parties.
“President Zelensky is absolutely correct. We are at risk of returning to the dreadful Franco-German Normandy Format, which presented Russia and Ukraine as equal partners in what was essentially an internal dispute,” Johnson stated.
Johnson reiterated that Russia is the clear aggressor in this situation and that Ukraine should not be held on an equal footing with the Kremlin. He further underlined that the only responsible course of action for the international community is to support Ukraine’s defence efforts robustly.
“Putin initiated this full-scale invasion, and Ukraine is entirely the innocent party in this conflict,” asserted Johnson.
Details of the Scholz-Putin Call
The conversation between Scholz and Putin on 15 November marked the first direct communication between the two leaders in over two years. According to media reports, Scholz initiated the call, which had been under preparation for several weeks with input and coordination among G7 members. This coordination was intended to ensure that any diplomatic interactions aligned with broader Western positions on Russia’s isolation.
However, Johnson and other critics view this dialogue with caution. Ukrainian officials, including those from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, have publicly stated that the conversation does little to advance peace efforts. Rather, they argue it provides the Russian leader with potential leverage to ease his international isolation. President Zelensky, referring to the call, labelled it a “Pandora’s box,” indicating the risks it poses by potentially encouraging Russia’s persistence in the conflict.
Ukraine’s Position on Dialogue with Russia
Ukraine has been clear in its stance on peace negotiations, arguing that any genuine peace efforts require Russia’s unequivocal withdrawal from occupied territories and accountability for the aggression initiated in 2014. The Normandy Format, established in 2014 by France, Germany, Russia, and Ukraine, initially focused on implementing a ceasefire and facilitating negotiations. However, many Ukrainians and international analysts argue that the process was fundamentally flawed, as it placed Ukraine in a disadvantaged position by allowing Russia to present itself as a neutral participant rather than the aggressor.
Johnson highlighted the urgent need for stronger Western support to counterbalance the impact of any diplomatic engagement that might weaken Ukraine’s standing.
“The only way to end this war is by massively and rapidly reinforcing Ukraine’s position,” Johnson concluded, underscoring that bolstered military support is key to a durable peace.
Diplomatic Reactions
Ukraine’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs shared a similarly critical view, suggesting that dialogue between Scholz and Putin could inadvertently give Moscow a platform to present itself as open to negotiation, a stance it has exploited in previous diplomatic settings. This position mirrors concerns held by several Western countries, which fear that any semblance of legitimacy granted to the Kremlin could hinder efforts to end the conflict and uphold Ukraine’s sovereignty.
The scepticism surrounding renewed talks with Moscow stems from a long-standing frustration within Ukraine and its supporters, who have seen previous negotiations fail to yield meaningful outcomes. Observers argue that earlier peace processes, including the Minsk Agreements and the Normandy Format, did not succeed in curbing Russian aggression or resolving the status of territories occupied by Russia-backed forces in eastern Ukraine.
Scholz’s Approach and Broader Implications
Despite these warnings, Scholz has defended his decision to engage with Putin, viewing diplomatic engagement as a means to keep channels open. However, his approach has met with mixed reactions among Ukraine’s allies, some of whom believe that such engagement could inadvertently undermine sanctions and other measures aimed at isolating Russia.
The potential reactivation of the Normandy Format remains controversial, with critics arguing that it could shift focus away from Ukraine’s right to sovereignty and divert attention from Moscow’s responsibility in the ongoing war. For Ukraine, the stakes remain high, as any negotiations must ultimately reflect its national interests and avoid pathways that risk normalising Russia’s actions.
Read also:
Putin’s Goal Isn’t Peace, But to End His Isolation, Says Zelensky
