President Volodymyr Zelensky has drawn sharp contrasts between Ukraine’s commitment to diplomatic processes and what he characterizes as Russia’s pattern of undermining peace efforts. His comments came in response to Russian allegations about a Ukrainian drone attack on Putin’s residence, which Zelensky dismissed as manufactured propaganda.
Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov accused Ukraine of launching 91 long-range drones at the presidential estate in Novgorod region during December 28-29. He described the alleged operation as state terrorism and warned that Russia would implement military countermeasures. Lavrov confirmed that despite successful interception of all drones by air defense systems, Moscow had prepared retaliation plans and identified specific targets.
Zelensky argued that Russian accusations served to create false justification for strikes on Ukrainian government buildings in Kyiv while simultaneously disrupting diplomatic initiatives. He emphasized that Ukraine consistently supports peace processes rather than taking actions that could jeopardize negotiations. The Ukrainian president specifically mentioned work with Trump administration representatives as potentially threatened by Russian manipulation.
According to Russian accounts, air defense networks successfully eliminated all incoming threats to the presidential property. However, Lavrov maintained that the attack attempt itself warranted significant response and would influence Moscow’s approach to ongoing peace discussions. He indicated that Russia would reassess its negotiating position while remaining engaged in diplomatic channels.
Zelensky called on world leaders to actively counter Russian disinformation rather than remaining silent. He referenced Moscow’s history of attacking Ukrainian government facilities, including the Cabinet of Ministers building, as evidence of a pattern where Russia accuses others of actions it regularly commits. The Ukrainian leader stressed that Ukraine does not take steps undermining diplomacy, contrasting this with what he described as Russia’s consistent pattern of such behavior. He emphasized that this fundamental difference in approaches represents one of many distinctions between the two countries’ conduct.