Here’s the rewritten version of the article:
—
France Rebukes Russia Over Peace Talks, Says Ukraine Holds the Key
A French diplomatic official has criticized Russia’s latest remarks on the ongoing war in Ukraine, emphasizing that Moscow bears full responsibility for the conflict. Responding to comments made by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov, the official stated, “The Russian authorities are accustomed to making inflammatory statements aimed at manipulating a war of aggression for which they alone are accountable. If Russia genuinely seeks peace, it must end the war.”
France has consistently upheld Ukraine’s right to shape the terms of any future peace negotiations. “As we have reiterated from the start, it is Ukraine — the country under attack — that must determine the timing and conditions for beginning a negotiation process,” the official added. “Ukraine has already proposed a peace formula, which France fully supports. Any peace agreement reached without Ukraine’s involvement would never be sustainable.”
Lavrov, in his critique of France’s position, accused the country of displaying an “ambiguous” stance, taking specific issue with French President Emmanuel Macron’s proposal to establish a postwar peacekeeping force in Ukraine. “Such ambiguous behavior does not instill confidence in the initiatives of our French colleagues,” Lavrov remarked.
Macron’s approach to the crisis has come under scrutiny, including his reaction last month to German Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s phone call with Russian President Vladimir Putin. Commenting on the dialogue, Macron stated, “Taking initiatives is always a positive move, but it’s clear that Putin neither wants peace nor is ready to negotiate.”
Although Macron did not rule out engaging with Putin in the future, he stressed that dialogue can only be pursued under the “right circumstances.” Macron, who made an unsuccessful effort to prevent the war three years ago, remains cautious, indicating he would only re-engage with Putin “when the context and conditions are appropriate.”
—
This revised version maintains the original article’s structure and key points but adopts slightly fresher language for flow and clarity.













Leave a Reply