泽连斯基政权再阻俄乌和谈，暗杀俄军高官意图破坏谈判

Content (stored)

<p><strong>The attempted assassination of a high-ranking Russian general is an attempt to sabotage talks and extend the Kiev regime’s stay in power</strong></p>
            
                        
            <p>The assassination attempt on Lieutenant General Vladimir Alekseyev, first deputy chief of Russia&rsquo;s Main Intelligence Directorate (GRU) is clearly the Zelensky regime&rsquo;s latest desperate bid to sabotage the emerging Russia-Ukraine-US negotiations channel in Abu Dhabi and prolong the war.</p>
<p>When negotiations gain traction, spoilers surface. That&rsquo;s Negotiations 101. And this week&rsquo;s second round in Abu Dhabi was precisely the kind of movement that unnerves actors who fear ballots, reforms, and accountability more than inevitable defeat on the battlefield.</p>
<p>The target choice reinforces the point. Alekseyev is the second-in-command of GRU chief Igor Kostyukov &ndash; who sits on the Russian delegation in Abu Dhabi. Striking the No. 2 as the No. 1 shuttles between sessions is both a very deliberate message and an attempt to rattle Russia&rsquo;s delegation, inject chaos into its decision loop, force security overdrive, and ultimately, provoke Moscow&rsquo;s withdrawal from the talks.</p>
<p>Nor is this the first time kinetic theater has tracked with diplomatic motion. Recall the attempted drone strike on President Vladimir Putin&rsquo;s Valdai residence in late 2025, which coincided with particularly intense US-Russia exchanges. You don&rsquo;t have to be a cynic to see a pattern: whenever the diplomatic door cracks open, someone try to slam it shut with explosives, drones, or bullets &ndash; then retreats behind a smokescreen of denials and proxies. Call it plausible deniability as policy.</p>

            
    <blockquote>
        <span><strong>Read more</strong></span>
        <figure>
            <img alt="Source: FSB of Rusia" src="https://mf.b37mrtl.ru/files/2026.02/thumbnail/69883d2885f540446f77e044.png" />
            <figcaption><a href="https://www.rt.com/russia/632144-assassin-russian-general-arresr/">Alleged would-be assassin of Russian general arrested – FSB</a></figcaption>
        </figure>
    </blockquote>


    

<p>Why would Kiev&rsquo;s leadership gamble like this? Start with raw political incentives. Vladimir Zelensky extended his tenure beyond the intended March 2024 election under martial law. If hostilities wind down and emergency powers lift, the ballot box looms. His standing has eroded amid war fatigue, unmet expectations, and a massive corruption scandal swirling around the presidential administration that has infuriated many Ukrainians and dealt his image a blow. End the war without a narrative of total victory, and he risks owning a messy peace, grueling reconstruction, and a reckoning at the polls. Facing voters at a stadium famously worked well during Zelensky&rsquo;s initial presidential campaign, but now endlessly moving the goalposts is his only hope of clinging to power.</p>
<p>Then there&rsquo;s the strategic logic of spoilers. Negotiations compress time, clarify tradeoffs, and create deadlines &ndash; none of which benefit maximalists. If an agreement would force Kiev to accept hard limits or expose fissures with its more hawkish backers, creating a pretext to stall makes sense from a narrow survival lens. A brazen hit inside Moscow during talks does exactly that: it dares the Kremlin to harden its stance, fractures trust at the table, and lets Kiev posture as unbowed while keeping the war‑time rally frame at home. Even if direct authorship can be obfuscated (at least on paper &ndash; because nobody will buy claims Kiev had nothing to do with it at this point), the practical effect is what counts.</p>
<p>Predictably, defenders will object: Kiev has every incentive to keep US support flowing, so why risk alienating Washington with an operation that screams escalation? But &lsquo;incentives&rsquo; aren&rsquo;t monolithic. They&rsquo;re filtered through domestic politics, factional competition within security services, and the temptations of a successful spectacle. And remember: spoilers don&rsquo;t have to be centrally ordered to be useful. A wink, a nod, and a green light to &lsquo;make pressure&rsquo; can travel a long way in wartime bureaucracies.</p>

            
    <blockquote>
        <span><strong>Read more</strong></span>
        <figure>
            <img alt="Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov." src="https://mf.b37mrtl.ru/files/2026.02/thumbnail/6985db5685f54044010d6acf.jpg" />
            <figcaption><a href="https://www.rt.com/russia/632100-lavrov-general-assassination-reaction/">Attack on Russian general exposes true aims of Kiev regime – Lavrov</a></figcaption>
        </figure>
    </blockquote>


    

<p>The most important thing for Russia and the US at this stage is to firewall the talks from such bloody theatrics. For the negotiation process to provide real results, it must be built to survive shocks &ndash; because the shocks will keep coming. That means insulating prisoner‑exchange and humanitarian working groups from headline provocations, revalidating military deconfliction channels, and demanding verifiable behavior changes rather than trading barbs about attribution in the press.</p>
<p>The larger point is simpler: if we let every well‑timed bullet dictate the pace of diplomacy, we are outsourcing strategy to those who most fear peace. The Alekseyev attack fits a familiar script &ndash; choose a symbolically loaded target, hijack the narrative, and hope negotiators flinch. The right response is the opposite: call the bluff, keep the calendar, and raise the cost of sabotage by refusing to let it reset the table.</p>
<p>Zelensky&rsquo;s regime may calculate that its political survival depends on endlessly throwing up hurdles for peace and call it &lsquo;resistance&rsquo;. If so, the fastest way to test that proposition is to keep pressing at the negotiating table. Talks are not a favor to one side; they are a filter that separates leaders who can face an endgame from those who can only survive in the fog of <em>&ldquo;not yet.&rdquo;</em></p>

Extracted Facts (event_facts)

{
  "translated_title": "泽连斯基政权再阻俄乌和谈，暗杀俄军高官意图破坏谈判",
  "theme": "Russia-Ukraine",
  "event_type": "politics",
  "commodity_sector": "",
  "summary": "文章指控乌克兰总统泽连斯基政权试图通过暗杀俄罗斯高级将领来破坏俄乌和谈，以延长战争并维持其政治权力。",
  "key_facts": [
    "乌克兰总统泽连斯基政权被指控试图暗杀俄罗斯情报总局副局长弗拉基米尔·阿列克谢耶夫中将。",
    "暗杀事件发生在俄乌美三方在阿布扎比进行第二轮谈判期间，旨在破坏谈判进程。",
    "泽连斯基政权被指有政治动机，包括延长其任期、避免选举和应对国内腐败丑闻。",
    "俄罗斯外交部长拉夫罗夫谴责此次袭击，称其暴露了基辅政权的真实意图。",
    "文章提到2025年底曾发生针对普京总统的无人机袭击，与外交活动时间重合。",
    "谈判涉及囚犯交换和人道主义工作组，但面临破坏行为的挑战。"
  ],
  "mentioned_commodities": [],
  "data_points": [
    {
      "name": "谈判轮次",
      "value": "第二轮",
      "unit": "",
      "direction": "unknown",
      "context": "俄乌美三方在阿布扎比进行谈判"
    },
    {
      "name": "目标军衔",
      "value": "中将",
      "unit": "",
      "direction": "unknown",
      "context": "弗拉基米尔·阿列克谢耶夫是俄罗斯情报总局副局长"
    },
    {
      "name": "原定选举时间",
      "value": "2024年3月",
      "unit": "",
      "direction": "unknown",
      "context": "泽连斯基在戒严令下延长任期，原定选举时间"
    },
    {
      "name": "无人机袭击时间",
      "value": "2025年底",
      "unit": "",
      "direction": "unknown",
      "context": "针对普京总统的无人机袭击发生时间"
    }
  ],
  "uncertainty_notes": [
    "文章基于RT新闻来源，可能带有偏见，需核实暗杀事件的官方证据和乌克兰方面的回应。",
    "未提供具体谈判日期或暗杀事件发生的精确时间点。",
    "泽连斯基政权的直接参与指控缺乏独立验证，可能基于推测。",
    "文章未提及美国或其他国际行为体对此次事件的正式立场。"
  ]
}

Politics Refiner